THE DUNLOP RUBBER CO. (INDIA) LTD. versus WORKMEN AND OTHERS

Citation: [1960] 2 S.C.R. 51 · Decided: 16-10-1959 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BHUVNESHWAR PRASAD SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 5 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

... 
S.C.R. 
SUPREM~ COURT REPORTS 
51 
provided under s. 25F, and as the provisions of s. 25F 
are better than the provisions of the A ward in respect 
of retrenchment the workmen would be entitled to 
compensation provided under s. 25F only, and not 
both under that section and under the Award. The 
appellant has already paid the compensation provided 
under s. 25F; the workmen therefore are not entitled 
to anything more under the Award. We therefore 
allow the appeal, set aside the decision of the Appellate 
Tribunal and restore that of the Industrial Tribunal in 
this matter. As this question has come up to this 
Court for the first time, we order the parties to bear 
their own costs. 
A j>peal allowed • . 
THE DUNLOP RUBBER CO. (INDIA) LTD. 
v. 
WORKMEN AND OTHERS 
(B. P. SINHA, C.J., P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR and 
K. N. WANCHOO, JJ.) 
Industrial Dispute-Comp,any carrying on business all over 
India-Claim by regional employees for raising of age of retirement 
and scale of gratuity-Power of Industrial Tribunal-If can modify 
uniform conditions of service according to prevailing conditions. 
The appellant company was an all-India concern and carried 
on the major part of its business in Calcutta. Its clerical and 
non-clerical staff in Bombay raised disputes relating to gratuity 
and age of retirement and contended that the scale of gratuity 
for both the clerical and non-clerical staff provided by the existing 
scheme of the company was low and should be raised and that 
the age of retirement for the clerical staff should be raised from 
55 to 60. 
The company resisted the claim on the ground that 
the existing scheme having been enforced on the basis of an 
ilgreement between the company and the large majority of its 
staff, both clerical and non-clerical, working in Calcutta, the. same 
could not be changed at the instance of a small minority. The 
tribunal rejected this contention and raised the age of retirement 
to 60. It also raised the scale of gratuity and made it uniform 
for the clerical and non-clerical staff. The appellant reiterated 
its contention in this Court. 
Held, that although it was advisable for an all-India concern 
to have uniform conditions of service 'throughout the country, 
that were not to be lightly changed, inqusfrial adjudication in 
I959 
Brahmachari 
Research I nstitule 
v. 
Their Workmen 
Wanchoo]. 
I959 
October z6 
I959 
Dunlop 
Rubber Co .. Lid. 
v. 
Workmen 
and Others 
52 
SUPREME COtJ,RT REPORTS [1960(2)] 
India being based on an industry-cum-region basis, cases might 
arise where it would be necessary to change the uniform scheme 
so that it might accord with the prevailing conditions in the 
region where the Industrial Tribunal functioned, in order to 
ensure fair conditions of service. 
Consequently, in the instant case, where the Industrial 
Tribunal found that the existing scheme was neither adequate 
nor in accord with the prevailing conditions in the region, it was 
not bound to refrain from altering either the age of retirement or 
the gratuity scheme on the ground the appellant's concern was 
an all-India one. 
Nor could the decision of the Tribunal to raise the age of 
retirement of the clerical staff to 60 be said to be an improper 
one. 
Guest, Keen, Williams (Private) Limited, Calcutta v. P. ]. 
Sterling and Others, [1960] (1) S.C.R. 348 referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeals Nos. 
159 and 160 of 1958. 
Appeals by special leave from the Award dated 
September 4, 1958, of the Industrial Tribunal, Bombay, 
in Reference (IT) Nos. 138 and 35 of 1958. 
N. A. Palkhivala, S. N. Andley, J. B. Dadachanji 
and Rameshwar Nath, for the appellant. 
G. L. Dudhia and K. L. Hathi, for respondents No. 
1and2. 
1959. October 16. 
The Judgment of the Court was 
delivered by 
Wan,hoo J. 
\V ANCHOO J.-These two appeals by special leave 
arise out of two references made by the Government 
of Bombay in connection with a dispute between . the 
appellant-company and two sets of its workmen, 
name! y, clerical staff and staff other than clerical. The 
clerical staff had raised four questions which were 
referred to the Industrial Tribunal, Bombay for adjudi.-
cation. Of these, only two points survive in the present 
appeal, namely, retirement age and gratuity. The 
non-clerical staff had raised two questions of which 
only one relating to gratuity arises before us. 
It appears that the ap_Pellant-comp'.l'ny is. an al~­
India concern but the maJor part of its busmess rs 

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