(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the Management against the Award of -the Industrial Tribunal dated 28th January, 1973, made on a Reference dated December 13, 1971, by which the Tribunal has decided the preliminary issues against the petitioner and has set down the dispute for decision on merits.
(2.) The material facts of the case are that respondent No. 3, Mr. B. D. Mathur, joined employment of the petitioner as Sub Editor in 19510 and was in May, 1965 made a special representative He was admittedly a 'working journalist' within the meaning of the terms in Section 2(f) of the Working Journalists Conditions of Service) & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1956 (which is hereinafter referred to as the Act). On his assignment as a special representative, the respondent claimed certain perquisities and benefits, which were denied to him. This raised an industrial dispute which was referred by the Lt. Governor, Delhi by his order dated December 13, !971 for adjudicatioa to the Industrial Tribunal. The terms of reference were as follows:
(3.) Mr Pai has advanced able arguments at length. In substance the controversy is this; In respondent No. 3 admittedly a Working Journalist covered by the Act. As such whether or not be is a workmen within the meaning of Industrial Disputes Act and whether or not the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act can be utilised to obtain the denied relief to him from the Industrial Tribunal ?