NDLI: Paradeep Phosphates Limited Vs. State of Orissa & Ors.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Industrial Disputes Act 1947: s.9A
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: s.9A – Change in conditionsof service – In 1998, due to financial crunch, Government decidedto enhance retirement age from 58 to 60 – Appellant-companyimplemented the said decision of government – However, since thefinancial position of appellant-company did not improve, governmentrolled back retirement age – Appellant-company restored the age ofretirement to 58 years – Industrial dispute – Industrial Tribunalinvalidated the action of appellant-company of rolling back theage of retirement from 60 years to 58 years due to contravention ofr.9A which says prior notice must be given to employees by employerwhich the employer intentionally omitted to give in the instant case– High Court upheld the order of Industrial Tribunal – On appeal,Held: s.9A is a provision in consonance with the Constitutionalmandate which assures the protection of principles of natural justicei.e., no one shall be condemned unless heard – s.9A provides thatbefore changing either of the things as envisaged in the FourthSchedule, prior notice must be given to the employee – Eighth clauseof the Fourth Schedule says “withdrawal of any customaryconcession, privilege or change in usage” – The order ofenhancement of superannuation of the employees though temporaryin nature amounted to privilege to employees since it is a specialright granted to them – Therefore, any unilateral withdrawal ofsuch privilege amounts to contravention of s.9A of the Act and suchact of the employer is bad in the eyes of law – Right to work is avital right of every employee and it shall not be taken away withoutgiving reasonable opportunity of being heard otherwise it wouldbe an act of violation of the constitutional mandate – There is noerror in the order of High Court – Service law.Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: Fourth Schedule, eighthclause – Eighth clause of the Fourth Schedule says “withdrawal of any customary concession or privilege or change in usage” – Terms“privilege” – Interpretation of – Held: The word “privilege” assuch is not defined in the Act – The Dictionary meaning of the word“privilege” means a “special right, advantage or immunity grantedor available only to a particular person or ground” – In other words,a particular and peculiar benefit or advantage enjoyed by a person,company, or class, beyond the common advantages of others – Orderof enhancement of superannuation of the employees would amountto privilege to employees since it is a special right granted to them.Service law: Change in conditions of service – Enhancementof retirement age – Held: Age of superannuation is an integral partof the service condition of the employee – Also, enhancement ofsuperannuation age would impliedly amount to a privilege since itwas provided particularly for the central public sector employees.Interpretation of statutes: Beneficent law – Liberalconstruction – Held: Beneficial laws should be construed liberally– The Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is one of the welfare legislationswhich intends to provide and protect the benefits of the employees– Therefore, it should be interpreted in a liberal and broad mannerso that maximum benefits could reach to the employees – IndustrialDispute Act, 1947.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.K. Agrawal
Neutral Citation	2018 INSC 377
Petitioner	Paradeep Phosphates Limited
Respondent	State Of Orissa & Ors.
SCR	[2018] 3 S.C.R. 507
Judgement Date	2018-04-19
Case Number	3997

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Paradeep Phosphates Limited Vs. State of Orissa & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Assam Match Company Limited Vs. Bijoy Lal Sen & Others

Caparo Engineering India Ltd. Vs. Ummed Singh Lodhi and Anr.

Mr.c.gupta Vs. Glaxosmithklin Pharmaceutical Limited

Herbertsons Limited Vs. Workmen of Herbertsons Limited and Ors

Laxman Vs. State Industrial Court & Ors

Sunil Kumar Biswas Vs. Ordinance Factory Board & Ors.

Harmohinder Singh Vs. Kharga Canteen, Ambala Cantt.

Mohd. Ali Vs. State of H.p. and Others

M/s. Awaz Prakashan Private Limited Vs. Pramod Kumar Pujari

Paradeep Phosphates Limited Vs. State of Orissa & Ors.

Paradeep Phosphates Limited Vs. State of Orissa & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Assam Match Company Limited Vs. Bijoy Lal Sen & Others

Caparo Engineering India Ltd. Vs. Ummed Singh Lodhi and Anr.

Mr.c.gupta Vs. Glaxosmithklin Pharmaceutical Limited

Herbertsons Limited Vs. Workmen of Herbertsons Limited and Ors

Laxman Vs. State Industrial Court & Ors

Sunil Kumar Biswas Vs. Ordinance Factory Board & Ors.

Harmohinder Singh Vs. Kharga Canteen, Ambala Cantt.

Mohd. Ali Vs. State of H.p. and Others

M/s. Awaz Prakashan Private Limited Vs. Pramod Kumar Pujari

Paradeep Phosphates Limited Vs. State of Orissa & Ors.