The Statesman Ltd. v. Union of India

1. -The petitioner in W.P.(C)No.3355/2008 ciaims to be a newspaper estabiishment as defined under the Working Journalists and aher Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Other Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') whereas the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.3692/2008 claims to be a news agency incorporatedasperSection25oftheCompaniesAct. W.P.(C)3355/2008&W.P.(C)3692/2008 ^ 2015:DHC:11085-DB

2. Both the writpetitions are filed with acommon prayerto declare the constitution oftwo WageBoards bythe Union ofIndia dated 24.05.2007in exercise ofthe powers conferred by Section 9 and Section 13C ofthe Act for the purpose offixing or revising rates ofwages in respect ofworking journalistsandalsonon-journalistsnewspaperemployeesasillegal.

3. When the matter is called,there is no representation on either side. However,we have observed thatin the counter affidavit filed on behalfof the respondent-Union ofIndia dated 13.05.2008,itis specificallypleaded thattheimpugnednotificationsdated24.05.2007constitutingthetwo Wage Boards were subsequently amended vide notification dated 03.07.2007 statingthatthereportofthe WageBoardsshall besubmitted within aperiod of[3] years. No other material is available on record contradicting the said plea ofthe respondent.

4. Thus,it is clear that the term ofthe Wage Boards constituted under the impugned notifications was only 3 years and the same stood expired long back in the year2010. ^ 5. Therefore,nothing survivesforadjudication on merits atthispointof time. Accordingly,both the writpetitions are dismissed as infiiictuous. No costs.

CHIEF JUSTICE MjiJh

4. TTTT JAYANT NATH,J JULY06,2015 kks