ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Indian Express Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.
1. Through all these writ petitions, a challenge has been made to the notification dated 12.11.2014 issued by State Government specifying the officers mentioned in Column II to be “authorities competent” to dispose the application under Section 17 of “Working Journalists and other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Misc. Provisions Act, 1955” (for short ‘Act 1955’), the reference order dated 10.03.2023 passed by Assistant Labour Commissioner, Gautam Budh Nagar and order dated 22.05.2023 passed by Labour Court, NOIDA rejecting the application regarding jurisdiction of Court.
2. Writ Petition No. 292 of 2024 assails the order dated 10.11.2023 passed by Labour Court, NOIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar in WJA Case No. 01/2023, 02/2023, 03/2023, 04/2023, 05/2023, 06/2023, 07/2023, 08/2023, 09/2023, 10/2023 and 11/2023. As all the cases are interconnected and petitioner is same in all the writ petitions, with the consent of the parties, they are heard and decided together. Writ Petition No. 292 of 2024 is taken as the leading case.
3. Petitioner before this Court, The Indian Express Pvt. Ltd. is a company incorporated under the provisions of Companies A
ABP (Private Ltd.) vs. Union of India
Pradhan Prabandhank/Unit Head M/s. Amar Ujala vs. State of U.P. and others
Hindustan Media Ventures Ltd. Jagatganj Varanasi vs. State of U.P. and others
Ficus Pax (P) Ltd. v. Union of India
Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar
Awaz Prakashan (P) Ltd. v. Pramod Kumar Pujari
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. v. Anil
P. Virudhachalam v. Lotus Mills
Nelson Motis v. Union of India
Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. v. Vemuganti Ramakrishan Rao
Indore Development Authority v. Shailendra
Samyuktha Karnataka vs. M.L. Satyanarayana Rao and another
Samarjit Ghosh v. Bennet Coleman and Co. and others
The Management of Samyutha Karnataka v. M.L. Satyanarayana Rao and another
Rajan Sandhi P. v. Union of India & another
Novttis India Ltd. v. State of West Bengal and others
State of U.P. and others v. Committee of Management D.A.V. Inter College and another
The Act 1955 constitutes a single scheme for the recovery of money due from an employer to an employee, and the notification specifying the officers competent to dispose of applications under Section....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the lack of power of delegation conferred on the State Government under Section 17(2) of the Act of 1955, rendering the References made by the Assi....
The state government has the authority to refer wage disputes to the Labour Court under Section 17(2) of the Working Journalists Act, providing a valid mechanism for individual claims despite jurisdi....
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 t....
The Act does not require notice to the employer before making a reference to the Adjudicatory Mechanism, and the Adjudicatory Mechanism is intended to provide an opportunity of hearing to the employe....
The State Government has authority to refer disputes involving non-journalist employees under the Industrial Disputes Act, validating such references under Section 4K of the State Act.
Section 17(2) Labour Court can determine incidental questions of category, cadre and nature of work while computing benefits due under notified wage board recommendations.
The court affirmed that the Labour Courts in Delhi have jurisdiction for disputes arising from the Majithia Wage Board recommendations based on combined cause of action and situs tests, emphasizing e....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.