Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has held that government provisions on premature retirement meant for officers cannot be extended to industrial workmen, striking down Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers Ltd’s (GRSE) “Premature Retirement Scheme for Unionized Employees” as contrary to law and violative of natural justice.
Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) observed that the concept of premature retirement, introduced through Fundamental Rules and Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) instructions, was intended for executives and public servants—not for workmen governed by the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The judge noted that the Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) itself had clarified that such provisions “would not apply to employees covered under the Industrial Disputes Act.”
Holding that GRSE’s scheme lacked legal foundation, the court quashed the Certifying Officer’s order dated June 28, 2018, and the Appellate Authority’s order dated July 14, 2022, insofar as they related to the workmen’s union, and set aside the Premature Retirement Scheme dated April 12, 2025, in its entirety. The bench found that the move to introduce a premature-retirement policy for unionised employees was “not in accordance with law and against the principles of natural justice.”
The judgment came on two writ petitions filed by the recognised union representing GRSE’s workmen, which argued that the company had attempted to bypass statutory protections under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act. The union maintained that administrative instructions issued for officers could not override the statutory framework that governs conditions of service for workmen.
The court recorded that the union had objected and made representations against the proposed scheme and found that the company lacked statutory authority to impose such a policy on industrial employees. It held that the service conditions of workmen are governed by the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act and the Industrial Disputes Act — legislations which cannot be displaced by administrative instructions meant for officers.
By reinforcing the distinction between officers and industrial workmen, the court reaffirmed that statutory labour protections cannot be curtailed through internal administrative circulars.