R.S.Pathak, J. - (1.) The petitioner is the owner of the Leader Press and at the relevant time published two daily newspapers, The Leader and the Bharat, and also carried on the business of publishing books.
(2.) On July 3, 1959 the petitioner submitted a set of Draft Standing Orders framed by it to the Labour Commissioner, Uttar Pradesh. The Draft Standing Orders contained provisions defining the terms and conditions of service of the working journalists employed by the petitioner. The Certifying Officer, after considering the objections to the Draft Standing Orders filed by the Working Journalists, modified some of the provisions and the Contending Orders so modified were certified by him under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 on January 10, 1962. The petitioner professed an appeal to the appellate authority constituted under the aforesaid Act and contended that a number of modifications effected by the Certifying officer were not justified. The appellate authority granted relief to the petitioner by its order dared October 5, 1962 in respect of some of the modifications only and affirmed the remaining changes effected by the Certifying Officer. The petitioner prays for certiorari.
(3.) In the Draft Standing Orders the petitioner had included a provision fixing the age of superannuation at 55 years or on completion of 80 years service, whichever was earlier, and it was further provided that no notice or payment of wages in lieu thereof would be required in such a case. The Certifying Officer deleted this provision and substituted another stating that the age of superannuation would be the date on which a working journalist completed 58 years of age. Another Draft Standing Order framed by the petitioner provided for the means of redress for working journalists against unfair treatment or wrongful exaction on the part of the employer. The Certifying Officer substituted a different provision altogether, which provided that ail such complaints would be submitted by the working journalist or on his behalf by the registered trade union of which he was a member to the Labour Officer of the industrial establishment and such officer would personally investigate the complaint, and the complainant working journalist or the registered trade union would have the right to be present during such investigation. The appellate authority confirmed the modifications made by the Certifying Officer in respect of both matters.;