- (1.) DILIP Gupta, J. This Special Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 8-12-2003 of the learned Judge dismissing the writ petition on the ground of availability of alternative remedy of raising an industrial dispute under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act' ).
(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Union of India, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State of U. P. and Sri Suneet Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 3 and 5. The petitioner appellant was working as a Sub-Editor in "dainik Jagran" at Varanasi. A show cause notice dated 9-4-2003 was served upon him requiring him to submit his explanation to the charges leveled. He submitted a reply and the Enquiry Officer, who had been appointed to enquire into the charges, after providing opportunity to him, submitted his enquiry report dated 24-7-2003. Subsequently a communication dated 20-8-2003 enclosing a copy of the enquiry report was sent to the petitioner appellant requiring him to submit a reply as to why the proposed punishment should not be imposed upon him. The petitioner appellant, however, did not submit any reply to the show cause notice. The Management thereafter served an order dated 16-9-2003 terminating the services w. e. f. 16- 6-2003. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order of termination, the petitioner appellant filed the writ petition which has been dismissed by the learned Judge. Learned counsel for the petitioner appellant placing reliance on the provisions of Section 16-A of the Working Journalists & Other News Paper Employees (Conditions of Service) And Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'jorunalists Act') contended that the termination order is illegal. Section 16-A of the Journalists Act is reproduced below:"16-A. Employer not to dismiss, discharge, etc. , newspaper employees.-No employer in relation to newspaper establishment shall, by reasons of his liability for payment of wages to news paper employees at the rates specified in an order of the Central Government under Section 12, or under Section 12 read with Section 13-AA or Section 13 DD, dismiss, discharge or retrench any newspaper employee. "
(3.) ELABORATING his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner appellant submitted that he had sent a notice dated 24-5-2003 to the Director of the "dainik Jagran Prakashan Ltd. " claiming salary according to the recommendations of Palekar, Bachawat and Marisana Vetan Boards since according to him the daily "dainik Jagran" comes under category 1-A and, therefore, the action of the Management in terminating his services, was in breach of the provisions of Section 16-A of the Journalists Act. Learned counsel appearing for the Management, however, controverted this submission and submitted that the termination order had been passed on the basis of a charge-sheet issued and after giving him adequate and proper opportunity to defend himself, the punishment was imposed.;