Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Rakesh Tiwari, J.
U. P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION UNIT KHADDA - Appellant
Versus
RAM NARESH UPADHYAYA - Respondents
C. M. W. P. 12413 Of 1990
Decided On : 08/28/2002
Age of Superannuation - Employment Dispute - U.P. Clause (LL) of the standing orders - [ll. Retirement of workman on reaching the age of superannuation.-- (1) A workman may be retired from service on reaching the age of superannuation which shall be 60 years ; (2) The Provident Fund record of the factory specifying the workmans age 'should, to begin with, be taken as the reliable record of the age of a workman for purposes of retirement.' (3) This record of the age stands modified warranted by the following : (a) Date of birth as given in the High School Certificate. If the school-leaving certificate is below High School, then such certificate must be authenticated by the District Inspector of schools or District Education Officer, as the case may be. (b) Date of birth as certified by a Municipal Corporation, Municipal Board, a Cantonment Board, a Notified Area or a Town Area Committee. (c) An insurance policy taken before November 1, 1960, provided that : (i) Whether the date, month and the year of birth of a workman are recorded in Provident Fund records shall be taken as final ; (ii) Where only the month and year of birth are given, the date shall be taken as the 1st of that month ; and (iii) Where the Provident Fund record of the workman does not specify the date or month of birth, in that case the 1st November of the year shall be deemed to be date for retirement (iv) The foregoing provisions regarding modification of age shall lapse on expiry of one year from the date of enforcement of these standing orders. (4) The age of new entrants shall be accepted on the following basis : (i) Date of birth given in the High School Certificate/ Transfer Certificate ; (ii) Date of birth as certified by Nagar Mahapalika/ Nagar Palika/cantonment Board/ Notified area Committee/ Gram Panchayat: provided that the new entrant shall furnish proof of his age within three months of the date of his appointment and the management shall accept it within six months of the date of appointment. The date of birth so accepted shall be final. (5) The management shall give two months notice to a workman before retiring him. (6) The workmen who are in employment at the time of enforcement of these standing orders shall have the right to get their age record modified as per Clause 3 above within one year of enforcement of these standing orders. He shall have the right to represent to the Regional additional/ Deputy Labour Commissioner of the area concerned within one month of notice of retirement such representations shall normally be disposed of within a period of one month of the date of receipt of representation from the workmen, and the orders passed by the additional/deputy Labour Commissioner regarding the age of the concerned workman shall be final and shall not be questioned by any party before any Court. In case the Regional Additional/ deputy Labour Commissioner allows the representation, the employer shall modify the record of age of the workman immediately on receipt of the said, orders.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a sugar factory, retired respondent No. 1 on reaching the age of superannuation based on the date of birth recorded in the service record. Respondent No. 1 contested, claiming a different date of birth based on horoscope and Kutumb Register.
Finding of the Court:
The Deputy Labour Commissioner directed the petitioner to record the new date of birth and granted benefits to respondent No. 1. The petitioner challenged the order as illegal and the findings as perverse.
Issues: Dispute over the correct date of birth for superannuation, reliance on horoscope and Kutumb Register, authenticity of documents, and jurisdiction of the Deputy Labour Commissioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The standing orders provide for modification of age based on specific documents, and the date of birth recorded at the time of employment is considered reliable. The date of birth cannot be changed at the fag end of service, and the employee cannot enforce changes after retirement. The Deputy Labour Commissioner's reliance on unproven and inauthentic records was held to be beyond jurisdiction.
Final Decision: The impugned order was quashed, and the petitioner's decision to retire respondent No. 1 on reaching the age of superannuation was upheld.
( 1 ) HEARD counsel for the parties and perused the record.
( 2 ) PETITIONER, the erstwhile Vishnu Pratap Sugar Works Pvt. Limited (hereinafter called as the secretary) carries on the business of manufacturing crystal sugar by vacuum pan process, situated at Khadda, district Deoria, After the acquisition of the Mill by U. P. State Sugar corporation (hereinafter called as the Corporation), it became its unit and respondent No. 1 became employee of the Corporation. In the service records of the Sugar Factory, the date of birth of respondent No. 1 was 7. 4. 1926, Accordingly, he was to attain the age of superannuation at the age of 60 years on 7. 4. 1986.
( 3 ) BEFORE his superannuation, respondent No. 1 was given a notice dated 19/27. 9. 1986 under clause LL (4) of the standing orders informing him that he would retire from service on 31. 10. 1986. A representation was made by the respondent workman to the Labour commissioner, U. P. Kanpur, challenging the retirement notice given by the General Manager of. I the Corporation. The Labour Commissioner vide order dated 15. 9. 1987, forwarded the representation to the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Gorakhpur, for decision which was registered as S. O. Case No. 29 of 1987.
( 4 ) ON receipt of notice from Deputy Labour Commissioner, Gorakhpur, the petitioner filed a written statement, inter alia, stating that the claim made by the workman was incorrect and that he had completed the age of 60 years and also that the respondent No. 1 had retired from service on 31. 10. 1986 in pursuance of the notice dated 19/27. 9. 1986. It is submitted that the retirement of the respondent No. 1 was based on the basis of the documents and the entry, made in the service record containing the date of birth, which were never disputed by him.
( 5 ) THE workman-respondent No. 1 contested the claim on the ground that his date of birth was 27. 3. 1934 and as such, he had not completed 60 years of age and he was being prematurely retired from service. In support of his case, respondent No. 1 filed his horoscope and Kutumb register and examined himself as a witness before the Deputy Labour Commissioner. He admitted that he had signed the P. F. form but could not prove any of the documents relied upon by him. He admitted that there were overwriting and cuttings in the Kutumb Register and that the original was never issued before him. He also admitted cuttings in horoscope and as such, he was not able to prove the copy of either the Kutumb Register or the horoscope.
( 6 ) THE petitioner examined two witnesses in support of his case before the Labour commissioner, namely, Ramesh Chandra Srivastava and Ram Bilas Singh, Ramesh Chandra srivastava, an Assistant in the office of Provident Fund Commissioner, Kanpur, brought the original P. F. Form No. 2 and verified from it that the age of the respondent No. 1 was mentioned as 31 years on 8. 4. 1957. He further submitted that he had received the application dated 27. 5. 1965 for changing the name of the nominee from the petitioner.
( 7 ) RAM Bilas, clerk in the office of P. F. Section verified that the P. F. record is prepared on the basis of age given by the workman and thereafter, it is verified by the Doctor. He also proved the copy of letter dated 1. 9. 1987 sent by the General Manager of the Corporation to the Assistant provident Fund Commissioner, U. P. , Gorakhpur, by which it was certified that the age of respondent No. 1 Ram Naresh Upadhyay was 31 years as on 8. 4. 1957. Lastly, it was stated by him in his evidence that the concerned workman had never made any application for correction of his age during the tenure of his service in the mill.
( 8 ) THE Deputy Labour Commissioner held that according to the entry made in the horoscope and the Kutumb Register, the date of birth of respondent No. 1 was 27. 3. 1934 and directed the petitioner to record this date of birth in the service record of respondent No. 1. He further granted all the benefits, w
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
