The certified standing orders of a company provided that the retirement age of the workman would be 58 years of age. The company enhanced the age to 60 years, as a temporary measure to retain the employees and to cut cos

Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 lays down that any employer who proposes to effect any change in the conditions of service applicable to any workman in respect of any matter specified in Fourth Schedule is required to follow the procedure laid down in Section 9A of the Act. According to Section 9A, the workmen likely to be affected by the proposed changes are to be given a notice in the prescribed manner. No change can be made within 21 days of giving such notice. However, no notice is required for effecting any such change when it is in pursuance of any settlement or award. In the instant case, the grievance of the trade union is justified as the withdrawal of the age of superannuation i.e. restoration of age from 60 years to 58 years without prior notice amount to contravention of the Fourth Schedule of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Hence employer was bound to give proper notice. The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 intends to provide and protect the interest of employees. If the company freely allowed to do so, then it could defeat the objective of the Act. It shall also defeat the rule of natural justice. Right to work is a vital right of every employee and it should not be taken away without giving reasonable opportunity of being heard. Moreover company's plea that Standing Orders stipulated the age of 58 years as superannuation age does not stand, as it had already implemented the change to enhance the superannuation age to 60 years without making amendment in the Standing Orders, while same had been accepted by the employees. Any unilateral withdrawal of such privilege amounts to contravention of Section 9A of the Act and such act of the employer is not appropriate in the eyes of law, therefore the trade union will succeed.