Judgment

VAIDIALINGAM, J.:- This appeal, by special leave, is directed against the Award, dated June 5, 1971 of the Labour Court, Delhi, in I.C.I.D. No. 19 of 1968 holding that the Katibs are calligraphists as defined in the Wage Board Recommendations and that they are entitled to the rates of wages prescribed by the Central Government Notification dated October 27, 1967.

2. In the petition for special leave the appellant had raised three main contentions : (1) The Wage Board exceeding its jurisdiction in including Calligraphists in the definition of Working Journalists and hence its recommendation is of on effect; and in consequence the Government Notification accepting the said recommendation is also void; (2) The Katibs are not Working journalists as defined in S. 2 (f) of the Working Journalists (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (Act 45 of 1955) as amended (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act); and (3) The finding of the Labour Court that the Katibs are Challigraphists as defined in the Wage Board Recommendations is erroneous. But this Court on September 8, 1971 granted special leave in respect of all questions raised in the special leave petition except the question as to whether the calligraphists were properly recommended to be working journalists by the Wage Board.

3. Therefore, it will be seen that the appellant is not entitled to raise the first question in this appeal that the Wage Board exceeded its jurisdiction in including calligraphists in the definition of working journalists. It further follows that the Notification of the Central Government accepting the recommendations of the Wage Board cannot also be challenged.

4. The appellant is publishing "Pratap" a daily newspaper from Delhi in Urdu language. Unlike English and Hindi, Urdu papers are printed with the help of Katibs and not with the assistance of compositors. Under S. 9 of the Act, the Central Government constituted a Wage Board by notification dated November 12, 1963 for the purpose of fixing or revising the rates of wages in respect of working journalists in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The Wage Board made its recommendations. In Schedule I, Section 1 relating to newspapers, the Wage Board had enumerated various personnel. In group 3, the Sub-Editor, Reporter, Correspondent, News-photographer, Artist, Calligraphist, Librarian or Index Assistant are referred to and their functions given. We will have to refer later to the definition of the two expressions "Artist" and "Calligraphist". In paragraph 4.27 of the Report the Wage Board had recommended that the working journalists of different groups employed in different classes of newspapers and news agencies should be paid basic pay per mensem in accordance with the sales given therein. The newspapers were divided into various classes and there is no controversy that the appellant belongs to class V. The pay scales for the type of employees enumerated in group 3 and referred to earlier, working in a newspapers coming under class V was fixed in the scale of Rupees 175-15-250-30-400-30-575. The Central Government, by and large, accepted the recommendation of the Wage Board subject to certain minor modifications. Accordingly the Central Government under S. 18 of the Act issued a notification No. 80-3883 dated October 27, 1967 directing that the recommendations of the Wage Board accepted by the Central Government have to be implemented from the dates mentioned therein. The Katibs in the employ of the appellant claimed that they are Calligraphists as defined by the Wage Board in its recommendations and accepted by the Central Government and as such they are "working journalists" under the Act. They claimed that they should receive the wages according to the scale as recommended by the Wage Board. The appellant was not agreeable to accede to this demand on the ground that the Katibs are not Calligraphists and in consequence they are not working journalists and as such