KASTURI Vs. HINDU STATE OF MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are appeals under Cl. 15 of the Letters Patent agaisnt the judgment of Veeraswami, J., in a batch of writ petitions filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution by the management of the "Hindu" for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the orders passed by the labour court, Madras, under S. 9 (2) of the Working Journalists (Fixation of Rates of Wages) Act XXIX of 1958 directing the payment of certain sums by the management to respondent 3 in the several appeals. The latter are being employed as copyholders in the press. The management have prescribed a grades system of wages to them. Their work is associated with the correction of proofs in the prepartion of the daily newspaper run by it.

(2.) IN preparing the daily, the matter taken up for publication, whether it be in the form of manuscript or typed script, goes through four stages of proof correction before it is finally incorporation in the final publication. The first or what is called the rough proof is checked up by the manuscript or typed script by two sets of persons acting together, namely, the proofreaders and the copyholders. The latter reads out the matter given for printing, while the proofreader follows the same with the printed proof in his hands. The proofreader, who is a acquainted with the symbols employed in proof correction, makes the corrections wherever necessary both with a view to bring it in conformity with the original and also to correct mistakes in printing. This dual agency for the correction of first proof, we are told, is employed only in a few newspapers among whom the "Hindu" is one.

(3.) THE respondents in these several appeals occupying the specified category as copyholders on the staff, claiming that they were proofreaders within the class of persons so designated, in the recommendations of the Wage Committee appointed under the Working Journalists (Fixation of Rates of Wages) Act, 1958, and as such entitled to receive emoluments, applied to the State Government for recovery of arrears of salary due to them on that basis (after giving credit to the actual amounts received by them from the management.) THE Government in due course referred the applications for adjudication to the labour court at Madras. THE management contested the applications stating that the copyholders could never be regarded as proofreaders. This objection has been overruled by the labour court which computed the amounts due to the employees on the basis that they were proofreaders and directed the management to pay the same to the respective persons.A certificate under S.9(1) of the 1956 Act by the State Government followed.