State Government Competent to Make References Under UP Industrial Disputes Act for Non-Journalist Newspaper Employees: Allahabad High Court - 2025-04-22

Allahabad High Court Affirms State Government's Authority in Newspaper Employee Dispute References

Allahabad, [Current Date] – The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a batch of writ petitions challenging the competency of the Uttar Pradesh State Government to make references under the UP Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for disputes involving non-journalist newspaper employees. Justice PiyushAgrawal , presiding over the case, upheld the state government's jurisdiction, relying on previous judgments of the same court in similar matters.

Case Background: Challenge to Labour Court Proceedings

The petitioner, a newspaper institution, sought to quash proceedings pending before a Labour Court, arguing that the references made under Section 4K of the UP Industrial Disputes Act were invalid. The core contention was that since the respondent employees, though working in a newspaper establishment, were not journalists, the central Working Journalists and other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955, and consequently the Central Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, should exclusively govern the dispute.

Petitioner's Arguments: Central Act Applicability

Represented by Senior Counsel Sanjay Kaushal , the petitioner argued that the respondent employees, being governed by the Central Act of 1955, should have their disputes referred under Section 10(2) of the Central Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, not under the UP Industrial Disputes Act. They highlighted that the employees themselves had initially invoked the Central Acts in their applications. The petitioner cited a previous interim order in a related writ petition where similar references were challenged.

Respondents' Counter: State Act Jurisdiction Supported by Precedent

Countering this, the counsel for the respondent employees, Mr. Man Mohan Singh, asserted the legality of the references under the UP Industrial Disputes Act. He leaned heavily on a prior Allahabad High Court judgment, Jagran Prakashan Limited and another v. State of Presiding Officer Labour Court and others (2020), which had addressed similar arguments and ruled in favor of the State Government's competency. He argued that the petitioner lacked locus standi to challenge the reference order at this stage and could only do so if aggrieved by the final award. Reliance was also placed on a Delhi High Court judgment supporting the view that reference orders do not inherently affect parties' rights at the initial stage.

Court's Rationale: Reiterating Previous Rulings

Justice Agrawal , after considering the arguments, reaffirmed the High Court's consistent stance in prior cases between the same parties. The court emphasized that in Jagran Prakashan Limited (2020) and M/s Bureau Chief Rastriya Sahara and another v. Labour Commissioner UP and others (2023), it was unequivocally held that for non-journalist newspaper employees, the State Government is the “Appropriate Government” under Section 2(a)(ii) of the Central Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and is competent to make references under Section 4K of the UP Industrial Disputes Act.

The judgment in Jagran Prakashan Limited (2020), extensively quoted in the current order, had explicitly addressed the question of whether a newspaper employee, not being a working journalist, is exclusively governed by the Central Act, rendering a State Act reference incompetent. The court in Jagran Prakashan clarified that while Section 3 of the Working Journalists Act extends certain provisions of the Central Act to working journalists, it does not automatically designate the Central Government as the sole "Appropriate Government" for all newspaper establishment disputes. Drawing attention to Section 2(a) of the Central Act, the court reasoned that newspaper establishments, not being specifically listed under categories where the Central Government is the Appropriate Government, fall under the residual clause (ii), making the State Government the competent authority.

The court reiterated that these prior judgments, which established the State Government's jurisdiction in similar scenarios, remained unchallenged and in force.

Decision and Implication: Writ Petitions Dismissed

Ultimately, Justice Agrawal found no merit in the petitioner's arguments, stating, "On two occasions between inter parties, this Court has taken a view that reference can be made by the State Government and the said orders have not been assailed by the petitioner... In view of above discussion, no case is made out for interference." Consequently, the court dismissed all the writ petitions, upholding the validity of the references made under the UP Industrial Disputes Act and affirming the State Government's jurisdiction in these matters concerning non-journalist newspaper employees. This judgment reinforces the established legal position within the Allahabad High Court regarding the appropriate forum for dispute resolution for this category of employees in Uttar Pradesh.