IMPORTANT POINTS
Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 and its Amendment, 1974 is intra vires.
Court should not interfere with decision of the specialized Board specially constituted for the sole purpose.

Headnote:(a) Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 – Validity – The Act is not ultra vires Articles 19(1)(a) and (g) and 14 of the Constitution. (Para 17)
       AIR 1958 SC 578 – Relied upon
       (b) Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 – Validity – Amendment Act, 1974 – Amendment Act only extending benefits of the Act to non-journalist employees – Not violative of Constitution – Petitioners cannot espouse the grievance of employees of electronic media, more so when they are not impleaded – Non extending similar benefits to other industries can also not be a ground to challenge validity of the Amendment Act – Challenge to validity with regard to Article 14 rejected. (Para 24)
       (c) Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 – Validity – Challenge to validity on ground of its becoming obsolete – Validity already upheld by Constitution Bench cannot be reopened on ground of passage of time. (Para 25)
       (1984) 1 SCC 222; (1986) 3 SCC 385; (2004) 11 SCC 526; AIR 1958 SC 578 – Relied upon
       (d) Interpretation of Statute – External Aid – Report of Second National Commission of Labour tried to be relied upon – Said report not accepted by Government of India – Not relevant for deciding vires of the Act. (Para 27)
       (e) Wage Board for Newspaper industry – Although growing but growth of electronic media is exponential – All the more reason for need of a Wage Board. (Para 29)
       (f) Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 – Sections 9 and 13C – Constitution of Wage Board – Being a part of Government that took decision to constitute the wage board – Does not invalidate a person as independent – Similarly merely by vague allegations of bias independence of a person cannot be challenged. (Para 33, 34, 39)
       (1973) 4 SCC 178; (2001) 1 SCC 182; (2001) 2 SCC 330; (1969) 2 SCR 779 – Relied upon
       (g) Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 – Sections 9 and 13C – Common wage board – Common Board specifically provided – Independent members and Chairman common for both Boards – No way affects the interest of the employers – Challenge not tenable. (Para 41)
       (h) Administration of Justice – Judicial Review – Determination of financial capacity of employers to pay – Court should not interfere with decision of the specialized Board constituted for this sole purpose. (Para 62)
       (i) Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 – Section 2(eee) – Wage – Variable pay – Majithia wage Board categorizing ‘basic pay’ and ‘variable pay’ separately – Not a new concept – The earlier Manisana Wage Board used the element of variable pay in the basic pay – Well within jurisdiction of the Wage Board. (Para 64)
       (j) Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 – Section 12 – Recommendation of the Wage Boards – Prerogative of Central government to accept or reject – No need to hear the parties all over again. (Para 70)
       Facts of the case:
       Validity of the Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 and the notification dated 11.11.2011 issued by the Central Government accepting the recommendations made by Justice Majithia Wage Boards for Working Journalists and Non-Journalist Newspaper and News Agency Employees has been challenged these writ petitions.
       Finding of the Court:
       Challenge as to the vires of the Act on the premise of it being ultra vires the Constitution and violative of fundamental rights is wholly unfounded, baseless and completely untenable.

Judgment :-

P. Sathasivam, CJI.

1) These writ petitions, under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, have been filed by the petitioners (management of various newspapers) praying for a declaration that the Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (in short ‘the Act’) is ultra vires as it infringes the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The petitioners further prayed for quashing of the notification dated 11.11.2011 issued by the Central Government accepting the recommendations made by Justice Majithia Wage Boards for Working Journalists and Non-Journalist Newspaper and News Agency Employees.

Factual Background:

2) It is pertinent to give a vivid background of the case before we advent to decide the issue at hand. Way back in 1955, the Government of India enacted the impugned Act to regulate the conditions of service of Working Journalists and in 1974 via amendment for other Newspaper Employees employed in newspaper establishments. For the purpose of fixing or revising the rates of wages of employees in newspaper establishments, the Central Government is empowered under Sections 9 and 13C of the Act to constitute two Wage Boards, viz., one for the working journalists and other for non-journalist newspaper employees respectively. Likewise, the Act also specifies that the Central Government shall, as and when necessary, constitute these Wage Boards. The composition of the Wage Boards is specified, as mentioned below:-

(a) Three persons representing employers in relation to Newspaper Establishments;

(b) Three persons representing working journalists for Wage Board under Section 9 and three persons representing non-journalist Newspaper Employees for Wage Board under Section 13C of the Act;

(c) Four independent persons, one of whom shall be a person who is, or has been a Judge of the High Court or the Supreme Court, and who shall be appointed by the Government as the Chairman thereof. 3) It is relevant to note that since 1955, six Wage Boards have been constituted for working journalists and four Wage Boards for non-journalist newspaper employees in order to fix or revise the rates of wages. The relevant details of the preceding Wage Boards are as under:-

(i) Divatia Wage Board

	Date of Appointment	Date of Acceptance	Challenge
	02.05.1956	10.05.1957	In Express Newspaper (P) Ltd. vs. Union of India 1959 SCR 12 the decision of the Divatia Wage Board as well as the constitutional validity of the Act was challenged before this Court. This Court set aside the decision of the Wage Board dt. 30.04.1957 on the groundthat it did not take into account the capacity of the industry to pay. As a result of this decision, an ordinance dated 14.06.1958 was promulgated which provided for the establishment of a Special Committee for making recommendations to the Central Government in regard to the rates of wages to be fixed for working journalists. Later, in September 1958,the Working Journalists (Fixation of Rates of Wages) Act, 1958 was passed bythe Parliament.
(ii) Shinde Wage Board
	Date of Appointment	Date of Acceptance	Challenge
	12.11.1963/ 25.02.1964	27.10.1967	In Press Trust of India vs. Union of India & Ors. (1974) 4 SCC 638, this Court struck down the recommendations of the second Wage Board insofar as PTI was concerned as unreasonable and far in excess of what the employees themselves were demanding and beyond the financial capacity of the establishment and hence violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution.
(iii) Palekar Wage Board
	Date of Appointment	Date of Acceptance	Challenge
	11.06.1975/ 06.02.1976	26.12.1980	The constitution of Wage Board was challenged on 20.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2014 Supreme(SC) 89

IMPORTANT POINTSWorking Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 and its Amendment, 1974 is intra vires. Court should not interfere with decision of the specialized Board specially constituted for the sole purpose.

Cases Referred (14)

Related Judgments

Plastikos Packaging VS Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad

SYSTEMS MANUFACTURING LTD VS SYSTEMS EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 665

JOGENDRA SINGH VS SURESH MANJULAPUR - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 662

MYSORE WINE PRODUCTS AND ALLIED CO. LTD. , BANGALORE VS PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 663

Bose VS State, rep. by Inspector of Police, Salaikiramam P. S. , - 2000 Supreme(Mad) 1273

Jain Construction Company VS State of Rajasthan - 2000 Supreme(Raj) 912

Voltas Limited VS Joint Collector, Medak - 2000 Supreme(AP) 945

STATE OF BIHAR VS SURENDRA SINGH RAUTELA ALIAS BENGALI - 2000 Supreme(Jhk) 45

Krishna Kumar VS Gulab Khan - 2000 Supreme(Raj) 1546

KARSANBHAI DAHYABHAI PARMAR VS DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE - 2000 Supreme(Guj) 1009

IMPORTANT POINTS
Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 and its Amendment, 1974 is intra vires.
Court should not interfere with decision of the specialized Board specially constituted for the sole purpose.