M/S. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD. SUVADIP BHATTACHARJEE vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR. — WPA/23673/2025

Case under Industrial Disputes Act ,1947 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 19th May 2026.

CNR: WBCHCA0478412025

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

31st October 2025

Filing Number

WPA/23905/2025

Filing Date

25-09-2025

Registration No

WPA/23673/2025

Registration Date

25-09-2025

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )

Sub-Category

AWARDS/ORDERS OF INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ( 14 )

Judicial Branch

MANDAMUS SECTION

Decision Date

19th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Acts & Sections

Industrial Disputes Act ,1947 Section NA

Petitioner(s)

M/S. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD. SUVADIP BHATTACHARJEE

Respondent(s)

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR.

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)

31-10-2025

NEW MOTION

13-04-2026

GR. - III (MOTION)

01-04-2026

GR. - III (MOTION)

02-03-2026

NEW MOTION (GROUP - III)

Orders

19-05-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)

CASE SUMMARY: WPA/23673/2025 The High Court at Calcutta set aside the Industrial Tribunal's award that had reinstated a worker based on a corrected date of birth. Justice Shampa Dutt found the worker's date of birth had been consistently recorded as 1962 in employment documents since 1985, but he produced a birth certificate dated only 7 days before superannuation claiming his birth year was 1966. Applying Supreme Court precedent, the court held that late corrections of date of birth on the eve of retirement are impermissible and that documents like Aadhar cards are not conclusive proof of age. The tribunal's reliance on the belatedly-produced birth certificate was therefore erroneous. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

CASE SUMMARY: WPA/23673/2025 The High Court at Calcutta set aside the Industrial Tribunal's award that had reinstated a worker based on a corrected date of birth. Justice Shampa Dutt found the worker's date of birth had been consistently recorded as 1962 in employment documents since 1985, but he produced a birth certificate dated only 7 days before superannuation claiming his birth year was 1966. Applying Supreme Court precedent, the court held that late corrections of date of birth on the eve of retirement are impermissible and that documents like Aadhar cards are not conclusive proof of age. The tribunal's reliance on the belatedly-produced birth certificate was therefore erroneous. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case