JUDGMENT :

R.F.NARIMAN, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The short question that arises in this appeal is as to whether the appellant – Registered Trade Union -had locus to prefer an application to modify a standing order that applies to the employees of the respondent under Section 38(2) of The Maharashtra Industrial Relations Act, 1946. The brief facts necessary in order to dispose of this appeal are as follows :

The original standing order with which we are concerned, and which stated the age of retirement of the employees of the bank, reads as follows :-

“22(7) Every employee shall retire from service on attaining the age of 55 years, Extension not exceeding one year at a time or three years in all may be given at the discretion of the president.”

3. By two Agreements dated 11.01.2004 and 21.02.2010 which were settlements under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act entered into between the respondent and its employees, it was agreed vide Clause 16 of the 2004 settlement and Clause 15 of the 2010 settlement that the retirement age would now be 58 years. A reference was made under Section 73A of The Bombay Industrial Relations Act (as it was then styled) to the Industrial Court, which t