JUDGMENT
Prabir Kumar Majumdar, J.
1. By this writ application the petitioners have challenged two Notifications issued by the Government of India, one SO No. 312(E) dated 30th May, 1986 and the other being SO No. 313(E) also dated 30th May, 1986. By the notification No. 312(E) dated 30th May, 1986 issued in exercise of powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 13-A of the Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (45 of 1955) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) the Central Government after consultation with the Wage Board has fixed the interim rates of wages in respect of working journalists at the rate of 15% of the existing basic wages subject to a minimum of Rs. 90/- per month. The said interim rates of wages shall be effective from 1st June, 1986.
2. By another similar notification being SO No. 313(E) dated 30th May, 1986 the Central Government has fixed the interim rates of wages in respect of Non-Journalists Newspaper Employees at the rate of 15% of the basic wages subject to the minimum of Rs. 90/ – per month.
3. The petitioner No. 1 is the well-known newspaper establishment carrying on business at Calcutta. The petitioner No. 2 is the Director of the petitioner No. 1.
4. The Central Government by notification being SO 527(E) dated 17th July, 1985, issued in the exercise of powers under Section 9 of the Act, constituted a Wage Board for the purpose of fixation and revising the rates of wages in respect of working journalists. By another similar notification bearing the same date i.e. 17th July, 1985 being SO No. 528(E) the Central Government constituted Wage Board for the purpose of fixing or revising the rates of wages in respect of non-journalists newspaper employees.
5. The Government of India received certain representations from various associations of newspaper employees requesting for immediate grant of interim relief. There was a claim for interim relief ranging from Rs. 200/- per month to Rs. 400/ – per month. In view of such overwhelming demand for such interim relief from the various association of newspapers employees, the Central Government was of opinion that the question of granting such relief may be examined and the recommendations of the Wage Board may be made available to the Government in accordance with the provisions of Sections 13A and 13D of the said Act.
6. By a communication dated 29th August, 1985 the Chairman of the Wage Board was informed of such representation and the desire of the Central Government for consideration of granting some interim reliefs.
7. By the said impugned notifications as aforesaid, the Central Government in consultation with the Wage Board fixed the interim rates of wages at the rate of 15% of the existing basicwages subject to a minimum of Rs. 90/- per month in respect of both working journalists and non-journalists.
8. Each of the said two notifications, inter alia, provided that (i) the interim relief shall be taken as part of the basic wages for all purposes including determination of admissible benefits such as contribution to provident fund, Employees State Insurance, gratuity, bonus, etc. (ii) where any newspaper establishment had, either as a result of negotiation with its employees or otherwise, agreed to pay interim relief to Working Journalists and non-journalists newspaper employees employed as such in or in relation to such newspaper establishment, and such interim relief is related to the basic wages or to the dearness allowance, it shall be permissible to adjust the amount of such relief against increases in the rates of wages made above, and (iii) provided that where the interim relief agreed to be paid by any newspaper establishment, in respect of any employee is in excess of the increases in the rates of wages made above, such interim relief agreed to by the newspaper establishment shall continue to be paid (i.e. shall not be reduced) in respect of such newspaper employees and they shall not be entitled in addition to the increase in rates of wages recommended above.
9. It is the grievance of the petitioners that by the said two impugned notifications the Central Government had arbitrarily and without assigning any reasons purported to fix the interim rates of wages at 15% and without any upper ceiling limit, and against the recommendation of the Wage Board of 7 1/2%. The Central Government in issuing the impugned notifications apparently did not apply its mind to the relevant factors and in breach of all principles of natural justice and fair play, doubled the quantum of interim rates of wages unreasonably and irrationally. According to the petitioner the effect of the said two impugned notifications are highly prejudicial to the business and financial liability of the petitioner No. 1.
10. It is contended by the petitioners that under Section 13A and 13D of the said Act the power of Central Government to fix interim rates of wages can only be exercised after consultation with the Wage Board and such consultation must be an effective consultation and not merely a formality or a sham consultation. It is the allegation of the petitioners that the Central Government in the instant case before issuing the said two impugned notifications did not consider at all the relevant factors which were taken into consideration by the Wage Board in making the recommendation. The Central Government had totally ignored without any rational basis the relevant recommendations of the Wage Board.
11. It is the further contention of the petitioners that it was incumbent upon the Central Government before issuing the said two impugned notifications to give a hearing to all persons affected including the petitioners and it was also incumbent upon the Central Government to give reasons, if any, for differing from the recommendations made by the Wage Board which were arrived at upon an application of mind on relevant factors. It is further contended on behalf of the petitioners that requirement of compliance with the principles of natural justice is inherent in the said Act and also must be read into Section 13A of the Act. Unless this is done the said Section would suffer from the vice of arbitrariness and would be ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution.
12. It is also the contention on behalf of the petitioners that there were no materials before the Central Government and no materials in fact, exist on which the Central Government would have formed the opinion as contemplated by Section 13A of the said Act.
13. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have also filed an affidavit in this proceeding. The affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 was affirmed by one A.K. Luthra, Deputy Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, on 13th November, 1986 at New Delhi.
14. By this affidavit the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have disputed the aforesaid contentions of the petitioners. It has been stated on behalf of the said respondents that before issuing the said two impugned notifications the Government after considering the recommendation of the Wage Board and other relevant factors in the matter fixed the said interim wage as mentioned in the said two notifications. It has further been stated by the said respondents that prior to the issuance of the said two notifications the Central Government had consulted the Wage Board. It has also been stated by the said respondents in the said affidavit that the interim rates of wages fixed by the said two notifications for the working journalists and non-journalists keeping in mind the relevant provisions of the Act. It has further been stated by the said respondents that the said two notifications have been issued pending final recommendations of the Wage Board and the order under Section 12 of the Act by the Central Government. The said respondents have also taken a plea of non-joinder, as according to the said respondents the working journalists and non-journalists, newspaper employees for whose benefit such notifications have been issued are not made parties in this proceedings. The other respondents have not entered appearance.
15. Mr. Sudipta Sarkar with Asim Banerjee appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has argued that the recommendation of the Wage Board with regard to interim relief for working journalists and non-journalists newspaper employees was that the interim relief for working journalists and non-journalists should be fixed at the rate of 7 1/2% of the basic wage subject to the minimum of Rs. 45/- per month. It is the submission of Mr. Sarkar that after hearing the parties concerned and after considering the submissions made by the respective parties, the Wage Board had come to the conclusion that it should be reasonable to grant such interim relief at such rate to the working journalists as well as to the non-journalists newspapers employees including employees of News Agencies and part time correspondents. It has been submitted by Mr. Sarkar that the Central Government arbitrarily raised the rate to 15% without giving any hearing to the parties to be affected. According to Mr. Sarkar, it is not in dispute that the petitioner No. 1 being a newspaper establishment would have to bear such liability of interim relief at the rate fixed by the Central Government by the said two notifications, and the decision of the Central Government in fixing the interim relief at such a high rate will affect the business interest of the newspaper establishment, financially or otherwise. In such a context, as submitted by Mr. Sarkar, it is incumbent upon the Central Government to ascertain the views of the newspaper establishments and also the concerned working journalists and non-journalists or the employees of the newspaper agency and part-time correspondents before fixing the interim relief at the rate as mentioned in the said two impugned notifications. Mr. Sarkar has argued it is clear from the scheme of the Act and in particular Sections 12, 13 and 13A of the said Act, that the Central Government before making an order finally fixing the rate of wages should consider carefully the recommendation of the Wage Board and after considering the said recommendation of the Wage Board may fix the rates of wages subject to such modifications as the Central Government thinks fit, provided such modifications do not effect important alterations in the character of the recommendation. It is further submitted by Mr. Sarkar that Section 12 of the Act specifically provides that as soon as may be after the receipt of the recommendation of the Board, the Central Government shall make an order in terms of the recommendations or subject to such modification, if any, as it thinks fit being modifications, in the opinion of the Central Government, do not effect important alterations in the character of the recommendations. Further, before making such modifications, it is incumbent on the Central Government in terms of the provisions of Section 12 of the Act to cause notice to be given to all persons likely to be affected thereby and shall take into account any representations that may be made by the concerned parties. Therefore, according to Mr. Sarkar, considering the scheme of the Act, in particular Section 12 of the Act, the said two notifications are bad and illegal.
16. It is further the contention of Mr. Sarkar that taking into consideration of the provision of the Act and in particular, Section 12 of the Act, the recommendation of the Wage Board, which is an expert body and which applies its mind to all relevant factors before making any recommendations, are normally to be accepted by the Central Government and if any alteration thereof is proposed by the Central Government then the same can only be made either by referring the matter back to the Wage Board or upon an opportunity of being heard given to all the persons likely to be affected by the modifications proposed to be made. According to Mr. Sarkar, the principle of natural justice is embodied in Section 12 of the Act.
17. Mr. Sarkar also argues that if such principle of natural justice is embodied in Section 12 of the Act it is equally applicable in case of fixation of interim rates of wages under Section 13A or Section 13D of the Act.
18. Mr. Sarkar has also argued that the entire scheme of the Act would indicate that the statute provides effective machinery for ascertaining the views of all concerned, namely, the newspaper establishment, the working journalists, non-journalists and other persons interested in the matter. The said statute also empowers the Central Government to fix the rates of wages, interim or final, after consultation with the Wage Board. It is submitted by Mr. Sarkar that Central Government in fixing the rates of wages, interim or final, should give hearing to the effective parties before making any proposal for fixation of the rates or wages, be it in interim or final and in doing so the Central Government should also give due consideration to the recommendation of the Wage Board.
19. Mr. Sarkar has submitted that the Act does not give any arbitrary power to the Central Government in fixing the rates of wages whether interim or the final relief. Mr. Sarkar further submits that “consultation” as mentioned in the various sections of the Act should be meaningful or effective “consultation”.
20. Mr. Sarkar, however, fairly submits that it is not wholly incumbent upon the Central Government to accept whatever recommendation that may be made by the Wage Board in respect of a fixation of rates of wages, interim or final. The Central Government can make its own recommendation but such recommendation, according to Mr. Sarkar, should conform to the principles of natural justice and the interests of both the parties the employers and the employee. He also submits that the Central Government before disagreeing with the views of the Wage Board should indicate the reasons as to why the Central Government does not accept the recommendation of the Wage Board. Mr. Sarkar has also argued that when the interests of the parties are likely to be affected the norms of justice require that the order making the fixation of the rates Of wages, interim or final, should state the reasons indicating the basis of the fixation of rates of wages.
21. Regarding the question of hearing to be given to the party affected, Mr. Sarkar has cited aSupreme Court decision . There also the Supreme Court had occasion to consider the scope and effect of Section 12 and other provisions of the Act.
22. On the question of consultation Mr. Sarkar has relied on a decision of the Supreme Court, which is known as Judge’s case, reported in.
23. Mr. Sujit Sinha appearing for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 submits that the provision for giving hearing as contemplated in Section 12 of the Act is at the stage of final recommendation by the Wage Board. Mr. Sinha has submitted that Section 12 does not contemplate any interim recommendation either by the Central Government or the Wage Board.
24. Mr. Sinha submits that considering the scheme of the Act, in particular Section 13A of the Act, the only requirement as contemplated by Section 13A of the Act is that where the Central Government is of opinion that it is necessary to fix interim rates of wages, it may do so after consultation with the Wage Board. It has been argued by Mr. Sinha that Section 13A starts with a non-obstante clause. Section 13A of the Act read that notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, where the Central Government is of opinion that it is necessary of to do so, it may, after consultation with the Board, by notification in the Official Gazette, fix interim rates of wages.
25. Mr. Sinha argues that this is not the final stage of recommendation nor the final order of fixation of rates of wages. According to Mr. Sinha, Section 13A of the Act only contemplates fixation of interim rates of wages and such fixation by the Central Government can only be done, first, if it is of opinion that it is necessary to do so and secondly, fix the interim rates after consultation with the Board. Mr. Sinha submits that “consultation” cannot be equated with “concurrence”. In support of this submission he also relies on the same decision of the Supreme Court cited by Mr. Sarkar appearing for the petitioner.
26. Regarding the point of recording of reasons and giving a hearing, it is the submission of Mr. Sinha that such requirement is only contemplated by Section 12 of the Act. Mr. Sinha submits that afixation of the rate of wages by way of interim measure is only contemplated in Section 13A of the Act. This fixation, according to Mr. Sinha, is by way of interim measure and it is not final. Whatever decision taken by the Central Government or what ever recommendation made by the Wage Board with regard to the fixation of interim rates of wages is by way of interim measure or in the nature of interlocutory order subject to the final recommendation of the Wage Board and subject to the final decision of the Central Government after taking into consideration the recommendation of the Wage Board.
27. Mr. Sinha submits that the decision of the Supreme Court is a case under Section 12 of the Act and there the recommendation was the final recommendation and not any recommendation of interim relief. Mr. Sinha submits that it is true that Section 12 contemplates a hearing, if any modification is proposed by the Central Government. This is what is considered and decided by the Supreme Court in the said decision . Mr. Sinha submits that this decision has no application to the present case.
28. Mr. Sinha further submits that there is no question of referring back the matter to the Wage Board for further consideration while fixing interim rates of wages. According to Mr. Sinha this recommendation is always subject to the final recommendation of the Wage Board and also the final decision, that may be taken by the Central Government after taking into consideration the final recommendation of the Wage Board. This fixation of interim rates of wages is purely in the nature of interim relief subject to further recommendation or further decision of the Wage Board and the Central Government, respectively.
29. Mr. Sinha has also taken a preliminary point that this writ application is bad for non-joiner inasmuch as the journalists and non -journalists to be affected by the decision of this Court in this proceeding are not impleaded in this proceeding.
30. In order to appreciate the respective submissions of the parties it would be convenient to refer to the relevant provisions of the Act.
31. Section 9 of the Act indicates the procedure for fixing and revising rates of wages. Section 9 of the Act reads as follows: –
9. For the purpose of fixing or revising rates of wages in respect of working journalists under this Act, the Central Government shall, as and when necessary, constitute a Wage Board which shall consist of –
(a) two persons representing employers in relation to newspaper establishments;
(b) two persons representing working journalists ;
(c) three independent persons, one of whom shall be a person who is, or has been, a Judge of a High Court or the Supreme Court and who shall be appointed by the Government as the Chairman thereof”.
32. Section 10 provides for recommendation by the Board:-
10. (1) The Board shall, by notice published in such manner as it thinks fit, call upon newspaper establishments and working journalists and other persons interested in the fixation or revision of rates of wages of working journalists to make such representations as they may think fit as respects the rates of wages which may be fixed or revised under this Act in respect of working journalists.
(2) Every such representation shall be in writing and shall be made within such period as the Board may specify in the notice and shall state the rate of wages which, in the opinion of the person making the representation, would be reasonable, having regard to the capacity of the employer to pay the same or to any other circumstances, whichever may seem relevant to the person making the representation in relation to his representation.
(3) The Board shall take into account the representations aforesaid if any and after examining the materials placed before it make such recommendations as it thinks fit to the Central Government for the fixation or revision of rates of wages in respect of working journalists; and any such recommendation may specify, whether prospectively or retrospectively, the date from which the rates of wages should take effect.
(4) In making any recommendations to the Central Government the Board shall have regard to the cost of living, the prevalent rates of wages for comparable employment, the circumstances relating to the newspaper industry in different regions of the country and to any other circumstances which to the Board may seem relevant.
33. Section 12 deals with powers of Central Government to enforce recommendations of the Wage Board.
Section 12 reads as follows :
12.(1) As soon as may be after the receipt of the recommendations of the Board, the Central Government shall make an order in terms of the recommendations or subject to such modifications, if any, as it thinks fit, being modifications which, in the opinion of the Central Government, do not effect important alterations in the character of the recommendations.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1), the Central Government may, if it thinks fit –
(a) make such modifications in the recommendations, not being modifications of the nature referred to in Sub-section (1) as it thinks fit:
Provided that before making any such modifications, the Central Government shall cause notice to be given to all persons likely to be affected thereby in such manner as may be prescribed, and shall take into account any representation which they may make in this behalf in writing; or
(b) refer the recommendations or any part thereof to the Board in which case, the Central Government shall consider its further recommendations, and make an order either in terms of the recommendations, or with such modifications of the nature referred to in Sub-section (1) as it thinks fit.
(3) Every order made by the Central Government under this Section shall be published in the Official Gazette, together with the recommendations of the Board relating to the order and the order shall come into operation on the date of publication or on such date whether prospectively, or retrospectively, as may be specified in the order. Section 13A deals with power of the Government to fix interim rates of wages.
Section 13A of the Act is in the following terms:
13-A. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, where the Central Government is of opinion that it is necessary so to do, it may, after consultation with the Board, by notification in the Official Gazette, fix interim rates of wages in respect of working journalists.
(2) Any interim rates of wages so fixed shall be binding on all employees in relation to newspaper establishments and every working journalists shall be entitled to be paid wages at a rate which shall, in no case, be less than interim rates of wages fixed under Subsection (1).
(3) Any interim rates of wages fixed under Sub-section (1) shall remain in force until the order of the Central Government under Section 12 comes into operation.
34. It appears from Section 12 of the Act, that the Central Government is required to make an order finally fixing the rates of wages, in terms of the recommendations of the Wage Board or subject to such modifications as it thinks fit, provided such modifications do not effect important alterations in the character of the recommendation. If any other modification is contemplated, then before making the same it is obligatory for the Central Government to cause notice to be given to all persons likely to be affected thereby. The Central Government may also refer the recommendation or any part thereof to the Wage Board for further consideration.
35. So, there are three requirements contained in Section 12 of the Act: first, the Central Government shall make an order in terms of the recommendations or subject to such modifications which do not effect important alterations in the character of recommendations. Secondly, whether the Central Government make any modifications in the recommendations not being the modification in the nature referred to Sub-section (1) i.e., the modifications effecting important alterations in the character of the recommendations, the Central Government shall cause notice to be given to all persons likely to be affected thereby, and thirdly, the Central Government will refer the recommendation or any part thereof to the Board in which case the Central Government shall consider its further recommendation and making an order in terms of the recommendation or with such modification of the nature referred to in Sub-section (2) as it may think fit.
36. I think it has been rightly contended by Mr. Sinha that Section 12 contemplates recommendation in the nature of final recommendation and the decision of the Central Government is also in the nature of final decision and in making such decision, as pointed out by Mr. Sinha certain norms as prescribed in Section 12 are to be fulfilled.
37. In my view, Section 13A of the Act contemplates the fixation of interim rates of wages by way of interim measure. It would appear from Section 13A of the Act that it requires consultation with the Wage Board for fixing interim rates of wages. Section 13A does not prescribe the elaborate procedure as indicated in Section 12 of the Act. In my view, there are reasons therefor. Section 13A provides for procedure by way of interim arrangement pending the final decision that may be taken by the Board or the Central Government after considering the recommendation of the Wage Board. I could not read in Section 13A of the Act any requirement of giving any personal hearing to the parties affected. Whatever recommendation that may be made by the Wage Board or whatever decision that may be taken by the Central Government after taking into consideration of the interim report of the Wage Board is always subject to final recommendation of the Wage Board or the final decision of the Central Government. There is a good reason for providing such elaborate machinery as contemplated by Section 12 of the Act. Whatever recommendation that may be made by the Wage Board at the final stage or whatever decision that may be taken by the Central Government pursuant to such recommendation or in modification thereof is final and binding on the parties. Such a decision, unlike a decision under Section 13A of the Act, is not subject to any other final decision of any other authority. In view of such a finality to decision to be taken by the Central Government under Section 12 of the Act, such safeguards are provided therein. In my view, Section 12 and Section 13A stand on two different footings.
38. In my view, these impugned notifications are not the final decision as to the fixation of rates of wages. The parties concerned can make further and effective representation to the Wage Board which is going in to the question of fixation of rates of wages for both working journalists and non-journalists or other persons such as part-time correspondents or the employees of the news agencies. After considering the representation of all the parties concerned the Wage Board may make fresh recommendation and Central Government may also accept the recommendation of the Wage Board in its entirety. If, however, the Central Government does not agree with the recommendation of the Wage Board then whatever modification that may be suggested by the Central Government can only be effected after hearing the views of the respective parties to be affected by the decision of the Central Government. By the said two impugned notifications, no final decisions as to the fixation of the rates of wages have been taken.
39. I, therefore, do not accept the contention of the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that it is incumbent upon the Central Government in making a decision as to interim relief to give hearing to the parties affected. I also do not agree with the submission of the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that at the stage of fixation of interim rates of wages as well, the parties should be given hearing or the Central Government should conform to the procedure as prescribed in Section 12 of the Act. As I have already indicated, the parties will have adequate opportunity of ventilating their grievances before the Wage Board when the Wage Board would be considering the case for fixation of rates of wages. The parties will also have further opportunities of being heard before the Central Government if any modification is suggested by the Central Government before taking a decision as to the fixation of rates of wages of working journalists as also non-journalists.
40. I do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned orders and I am not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioners in this proceeding.
41. For the reasons aforesaid, this writ application fails and is dismissed. The Rule is discharged.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.