Employers Can’t Dispute Employees Date of Birth at Fag End of Their Service: Supreme Court

Employers Can’t Dispute Employees’ Date of Birth at Fag End of Their Service

Case: Shankar Lal versus Hindustan Copper Ltd and others

Coram: Justices DY Chandrachud and Aniruddha Bose

Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL NO.2858 OF 2022

Court Observation: “This exercise was conducted without giving any opportunity of hearing to the appellant and at the fag end of his service tenure. Otherwise, various documents including the L.I.C. policy consistently reflect 21st September 1949 to be the appellant’s birthdate”

“This is not a case where a workman is seeking to change his date of birth to his benefit at the end of his career. This is a case where the employer is altering the records at the end of the career of the workman to his detriment by taking a unilateral decision that the date of birth specified in the appellant’s service book was erroneous, relying on a date disclosed in a statutory form”

“VRS benefit is an entitlement and assumes the character of property to the employee concerned once his application for VRS is accepted. It is the right of a person under Article 300A of the Constitution of India to have the VRS benefit to be given on accurate assessment thereof, the employer here being a public sector unit. If at the time of quantifying the VRS benefit after accepting an employee’s application for voluntary retirement, the employer take any step that would reduce such benefit in monetary terms, such step shall have to be taken under the authority of law.

We find the action of the employer lacking in authority of law in this case on two counts. First, it fails for not adhering to the principles of natural justice. The decision not to follow the service book recordal was taken without giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant. The opportunity of hearing of the appellant also accrued because the employer themselves had proceeded on the basis that the later date i.e., 21st September 1949 was the birthdate of the appellant and this was a long established position. Moreover, since in the own records of the employer two dates were shown, under normal circumstances it would have been incumbent on their part to undertake an exercise on application of mind to determine in which of these two records the mistake had crept in. That process would also have had to involve participation of the appellant, which would have been compatible with the principles of natural justice. There are several authorities in which this Court has deprecated the practice on the part of the employees at the fag end of their career to dispute the records pertaining to their dates of birth that would have the effect of extension of the length of their service. The very reasoning on which an employee is not permitted to raise age­-correction plea at the fag end of his service to extend his tenure should also apply to the employer as well. It is the employer here who had proceeded on the basis of age of the appellant reflected in his service book during the latter’s service tenure and they ought not to be permitted to fall back on the Form “B” which would curtail the VRS benefit of the appellant”.

Previous Posts

Section 482 CrPC – There Has To Be Some Factual Supporting Material For FIR Allegations: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings

Affidavits Not Mere Sheets of Paper but Solemn Statements on Oath: Supreme Court Upholds Cancellation of NOIDA Plot Allotment

Intelligible Differentia: Supreme Court Upholds State Policy To Deny Bonus Marks To NRHM/NHM Employees In Other States

Land Acquisition Act 1894 – Injurious Affection To Property May Stand On A Different Footing From Injurious Affection To Earnings: Supreme Court

Transfer Order Unsustainable If It Is Based On Irrelevant Ground & Not On Any Germane Factor: Supreme Court

Penetrative Sexual Act Between The Thighs Of Victim Held Together Is Rape As Defined U/S 375 IPC: Kerala High Court Download Judgement