Point of Law: Under Section 17(2) of the Act of 1972 which mandates that if any question arises as regards the amount due, it is the duty of the State Government either on an application or by itself to refer it to the Labour Court for adjudication.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

1. Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. D. Choudhury learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Mr. R.K. Dev Choudhury, learned CGC appears on behalf of the respondent no. 1, Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appears on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 to 6 and Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent no. 7. Both the writ petitions are taken up together as both are interconnected.

2. As contentions in the W.P. (C) No. 7158/2021 touches upon the authority and the jurisdiction of the Labour Commissioner to act in terms with Section 17 of the Working Journalists and other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (hereinafter for short referred to the Act of 1955) the same is first taken up. In W.P. (C) No. 7158/2021 the petitioners have assailed the Notification dated 14.03.1996 whereby the Governor of Assam through the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam, Labour and Employment Department had issued the said notification in exercise of the powers under Section 17(1) of the Act of 1955 and under Section 9(1) of the Working Journalists (Fixation of Rate of Wages) Act, 1958 whereby the Labour Commissioner was appointed as the authority under the said Act to enable the employees to prefer claim petitions before him for recovery of the arrears due to the employees under the said Act and to dispose of the said claim petitions by the authority under the provisions of the said Act. It is the contention of the petitioners that a perusal of the Section 17(1) would show that application as regards any amount due under the Act of 1955 has to be made to the State Government for recovery of the amount and the State Government or any authority as the State Government may specify in their behalf thereupon can pass such orders as within the ambit of Section 17(1) of the Act of 1955.

3. Mr. Das, learned Senior Counsel draws the attention of this Court to the Working Journalists (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Rules, 1957 (hereinafter for short referred to the Rules of 1957) and more particularly to Rule 36, wherein it is being mentioned that an application under Section 17 of the Act shall be made in Form-C to the Government of the State, where the Central Office or the Branch Office of the newspaper establishment in which the newspaper employee is employed is situated. He further draws the attention of this Court to Form No. C wherein it has been mentioned that the said application has to be made to the Secretary to the Government. On the basis of this provisions the learned Senior Counsel contends that the claim petition cannot be made to the Labour Commissioner and it has made to the State Government in the manner prescribed in Rule 36 of the Rules of 1957 and in the form as stipulated in Form No. C. He further contends that the Labour Commissioner has not power to adjudicate the disputes or any question as regards the dues. The Labour Commissioner can at best have the authority to act within the four corners of the powers given in Section 17(1) of the Act of 1955. He submits that when a question arises as regards dues, it has to be in consonance with Section 17(2) of the Act and therefore contends that the said Notification dated 14.03.1996 is ultra-vires the Act of 1955 as well as the Rules framed therein under.

4. On the other hand, Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate submits that Section 17(1) of the Act of 1955 categorically empowers the State Government to specify such authority and by way of the particular notification the State Government had specified, authorized and appointed the Labour Commissioner, Assam to be the authority within the meaning of Section 17(1) of the Act of 1955. Mr. Borthakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 6 in W.P. (C) No. 7158/2021 submits that not only Section 17(1) empow