JUDGMENT :

S.N. Prasad, J.

The order dated 22.6.1999 passed by the Labour Court, Jeypore in I.D. Misc. Case No.29 of 1996 whereby and where under an application filed by the petitioner under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has been held to be not maintainable and as such rejected.

2. Brief case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as News Contributor for three months on 9.12.1988. He continued to discharge duty but remuneration has not given to him, hence issued notice through Advocate demanding payment, however the management has denied its liability. Hence, an application has been filed under Section 33-C(2) of the I.D. Act but however the same was rejected being held to be not maintainable on the ground that the petitioner who is a working journalists could have resorted the procedure contemplated under Section 17(2) of the Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955, since the remuneration which the petitioner is claiming has been disputed by the management.

3. Before appreciating the legality and propriety of the order, it is necessary to deal with the provision of Section 33-C(2) and t