M.P. VIDYUT KARAMCHARI SANGH versus M.P. ELECTRICITY BOARD

Citation: [2004] 3 S.C.R. 105 · Decided: 18-03-2004 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.N. KHARE · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

M.P. VIDYUT KARAMCHARI SANGH 
v. 
M.P. ELECTRICITY BOARD 
MARCH I 8, 2004 
(V.N. KHARE, CJ., S.B. SINHA AND S.H. KAPADIA, JJ.] 
Constitution of India-Schedule VII Entries 22,23,24 and 38-
Electricit)~Legislation relating to employees of Electricity Board-Competence 
A 
B 
of State Legislature-Held, Presence of "electricity" in Entry 38 would not C 
debar the State Legislature from enacting laws to regulate the conditions of 
service of electricity Board's employees. 
Constitution of India-Article 254(2)-Parliamentary Law and State 
Law-Conflict between-Effect of-Regulations framed under Parliamentary 
Law-Standing Order issued under State Law-Regulation providing age of D 
retirement at 58 years-Standing Order permitting agreement enhancing age 
of retirement beyond 58 years-State Law receiving assent of the President-
Held, State Law would prevail over Relations framed under Parliamentary 
Law-Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948-s. 79(c). 
Interpretation of Statute-General law and special /aw-Effect of- E 
Regulations framed under Electricity (Suppl.) Act providing age of retirement 
at 58 years-State Legislature enacting Madhya Pradesh Industrial Employment 
(Standing Orders) Act· dealing with service conditions of employees-Act 
permitting its own exclusion if notification applying other rules and regulations 
issued by the State Government-No such notification Issued-Standing Order F 
issued under the State Act-Standing Order permitting agreement enhancing 
age of retirement beyond 58 years-Held, State Act is a special Act and would 
prevail over the provisions of the Regulations framed under the general law 
unless it is excluded by notification-Electricity (supply) Act, 1948-Section 
79(c)-Madhya Pradesh Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1961-
&~w 2 m. 
G 
Maxims and Phrases-Generalia specialibus non derogant-Applicability 
of 
Labour Law-Retirement-Age of-Agreement-Expiry of-Effect of-
105 
H 
106 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2004] 3 S.C.R. 
A Agreement between parties enhancing age of retirement to 60 years-
Regulations providing for retirement age of 58 Years-Agreement expiring on 
a particular date-Notification issued after expiry of agreement making the 
age of retirement as 58 years-Held, notification cannot be faulted with-
Agreement is not law-Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948-Section 79(c)-Madhya 
B Pradesh Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules, 1963-Standing 
Order 14A-Nature of 
c 
labour law-Age of retirement-Alteration in-Permissibility of-Held, 
alteration of retirement age is a matter of executive policy-Permissible for 
sufficient and cogent reasons. 
In 1963, the respondent Board adopted Fundamental and 
Supplementary Rules and other service conditions as in force in Civil 
Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules. In 1976, by a 
notification issued under Section 79(c) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, the 
respondent Board adopted Madhya Pradesh Shasakiya Sevak 
D (Adhivarshiki Ayu) Sanshodhan Adhiniyam relating to the retirement age 
of Government employee under Fundamental Rule 56(3) prescribing 58 
years as the age of superannuation. 
The State Legislature had enacted the Madhya Pradesh Industrial 
Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1961 for providing for matters 
E relating to the conditions of employment. It received the assent of the 
President in terms of Article 254(2) of the Constitution of India. Madhya 
Pradesh Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules, 1963 were 
framed under the provisions of the said Act. Standing Order 14A appended 
to the said Rules provided that an employee would retire from service on 
F the date he attained the age of 58 years. However, proviso to the said 
standing Order stated that nothing therein would adversely affect the 
operation of terms of any contract, agreement, settlement or award on 
the said subject. Section 2(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial 
Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1961 provided that the provisions of 
the Act would not be applicable to an undertaking in respect of which 
G Fundamental and Supplementary Rules, Civil Services (Classification, 
Control and Appeal) Rules or any other rules or regulations that may be 
notified by the State Government in the official Gazette apply. No 
notification was issued by State Government under Section 2(2) of the 
Madhya Pradesh Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1961. 
H 
On 10.6.1996, the appellant and the respondent Electricity Board 
M.P. VIDYUT KARAMCHARI SAN

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.