WORKMEN OF MANIPAL PRINTERS AND PUBLISHERS LIMITED Vs. MANAGEMENT OF MANIPAL PRINTERS AND PUBLISHERS LIMITED NOW CHANGED ITS NAME AS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Association is a union of workmen of the second respondent establishment. The first respondent is a publisher and the second respondent is a printer. The first respondent publishes the following:

(2.) THE Government of India appointed a Wage Board for non-journalist employees of the newspaper industry in November 1975, under Section 17 of the Working Journalists and other newspaper Employees (Conditions of Services) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (Act 45 of 1955) and the said Wage Board made recommendations in respect of interim wages, to the government of India which accepted the recommendations by an order dated 01. 04. 1977. The government of India thereafter constituted a Tribunal headed by Justice C. C. Palekar, under section 13dd (1) of the said Act for purposes of fixing and revising rates of wages in respect of non-journalist newspaper employees on the ground that the Wage Board constituted earlier had not been able to function effectively. The recommendations made by the Tribunal were accepted by the government as per order dated 26. 12. 1980.

(3.) IT was contended by 64 workmen of respondent No. 2, represented by the petitioner, that the above named publications published by respondent No. 1 were newspapers within the meaning of Section 2 (b) of Act 45 of 1955. And as the same are printed by respondent No. 2, the management of the said respondents would constitute a single newspaper establishment within the meaning of Section 2 (d) of Act 45 of 1955. Hence the orders passed by the Government of india under the Act in respect of wage scales and other allowances applicable to newspaper employees as also the petitioner workmen, be implemented. The petitioner submitted a charter of demand urging the respondents to implement the Wage Board recommendations. The respondents failed to do so. The petitioner approached the Labour Commissioner and conciliation Officer, who initiated conciliation proceedings. The conciliation having failed, the dispute was referred to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication.