INDIAN EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS (P) LTD. ETC. ETC. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1994] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 18 · Decided: 23-09-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
INDIAN EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS (P) LTD. ETC. ETC. 
B 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
SEPTEMBER 23, 1994 
[KULDIP SINGH, P.B. SAWANT AND N.P. SINGH, JJ.] 
Working Journalists [Conditions of Service] and Miscellaneous 
Provisions Act 1955, ss. 2(d), 8, JO and 13B-Constitution of India, Articles 
14, 19(l)(a) and (g)--Bachawat Wage Board award-{fnits of newspaper es-
C tablishments having gross revenue above Rs. 2 crores considered in the class 
of main establishment for purposes of wage fu:ation-Other units having gross 
revenue less than two crores considered belonging to classes two grades 
above-Held, the classification was discriminatory; the limitation of upgrada-
tion by two classes will apply to the fonner units also 
D 
Working Journalists [Conditions of Service] and Miscellaneous 
Provisions Act 1955, ss.2( d), 8, JO and 13B-conslitution of India, Articles 
14, 19(1)(a) and (g)--Bachawat Wage Board award-Classification of 
newspaper establishments on all-India basis and clubbing of units for fu:ation 
of wages-Definition of 'newspqper establishment' amended retrospective-
E ly-Held, classification not violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and (g). 
Accepting the recommendations of the Wage Board constitnted 
under the chairmanship of Shri Bachawat in its award dated May 26, 1989 
('Bachawat Award'), the Central Government issued two orders ('orders') 
both dated Augnst 31, 1989 under S.11 of the Working Jonrnalists [Con-
F ditions of Service I and Miscellaneons Provisions Act 1955 ('Act') fixing 
wage scales, grades, Honse 'R.nt and City Compensatory allowance for 
newspaper employees. By an amendment to the Act retrospective from 
August 28, 1989, a 'newspaper establishment' under S.2(d) inclnded its 
different departments, centres and branches and even its printing press. 
G An explanation added to S.10(4) enabled the wage board constituted nnder 
the Act to make recommendations for fixation of wages on an all-India 
basis. 
The petitioner newspaper establishments challenged the two orders 
and the amendments to the A~t on the gronnd that in view of the decision 
H in Express Newspapet (Pvt.) Ltd. andAnr. v. Union of India and Ors., [1959] 
18 
.. 
·' 
INDIAN EXPRESS v. U.0.1. 
19 
SCR 12 which recognised the industry's capacity to pay on an industry· A 
cum· region basis as an important circumstance in thefixation of wages, 
the orders and the amendments which overlooked the economic viability 
and capacity of individual weaker units of a newspaper establishment 
would be violative of Articles 19(1)(a) and (g) of the Constitution. Further 
B 
the classification by the Bachawat Award of those units earning gross 
revenue of not less Rs. 2 crores along with the main establishment while 
placing other units earning a gross revenue of less than Rs. 2 crores in 
classes only two grades above was discriminatory. The Bachawat Award 
also ignored the actual advertisement revenue as a percentage of gross 
revenue earned by the establishment and made no provision for even a 
reasonable depreciation. The retrospectivity of the recommendations ef· C 
fective from January 1, 1988. conpled with the increased costs of newsprint 
imposed an unreasonable burden. 
Partly allowing the petitions, this Court 
HELD : 1. While applying the principle of fixation of wages on all D 
India basis the Board has made a discrimination between newspaper 
establishments belonging to classes IA to V (earning gross revenue of not 
less than Rs. 2 crores) and those belonging to classes VI to IX (earning 
gross revenue less than R•. 2 crores). There is no satisfactory explanation 
to defend the said discrimination. The award will have to be modified by E 
extending the limitation of upgradation upto the maximum of two classes 
to all classes of newspaper establishments. [31-H, 32-A·B] 
2.1. The classification of the newspaper establishments on all India 
basis for the purpose of fixation of wage is not violative of the petitioner's 
fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(a) and (g). The units of an estab· 
lishement which bas branches all over India can be clubbed together for the 
purpose offixation of wages. After the amendment of S.2( d) retrospectively 
read with the addition of the Explanation to S.10( 4), the old provisions can 
no longer be pressed into service to contend against the grouping of the 
units of the all India establishments, into one class. [32·D·E·G) 
Express Newspaper (Pvt.) Ltd. and Anr. v. Union of India and Oi:s.,

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.