Showing the contexts in which working journalist act doctypes: delhi appears in the document
The provisions of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 (20 of 1946), as in force for the time being, shall apply to every newspaper establishment wherein twenty or more newspaper employees are employed or were employed on any day of the preceding twelve months as if such news paper establishment were an industrial establishment to which the aforesaid Acthas been applied by a notification under Sub-section (3) of Section 1 thereof, and as if a newspaper employee were a workman within the meaning of that Act.
definition of workman. The Working Journalists (Industrial Disputes) Act 1 of 1955 was passed on March 12, 1955. The object of the Act as given in the objects and reasons are: "One of the matters referred to the Press Commission was the settlement of disputes affecting workingjournalists. The Press Commission examined the position in the light of judicial pronouncements and found that working journalists did not come within the scope of the Industrial DisputesAct." The Commission, however, considered it essential that they should be entitled to the benefits of the procedure for the investigation and settlement of disputes envisaged in that Act and the Bill was designed to achieve the same object by extending the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. The provisions of the Act have given the definition of the working
journalist as employed in, or in relation to, any establishment for the production or publication of a newspaper or in, or in relation to, any news agency. Section 3 of this Act reads: "The provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, shall apply to, or in relation to, working journalists as they apply to, or in relation to workmen within the meaning of that Act." This Act was repealed by theWorking Journalists (Conditions of Service and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 45 of 1953. Section 3 of this Act has maintained the provisions of Section 3 of the Act 1 of 1955. The result is that by a fiction of law, the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act have been extended to and applied to, or in relation to the working journalists, in the same manner and to the same extent as they apply to, or in relation to, workman defined in Industrial Disputes Act. Consequently, the workingjournalists are fully entitled to take advantage of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Actlike any other workman without their being labelled workman as such. The modification of the Industrial Disputes Act in its application to working journalists is indicated by Sub-section
raises a dispute which cannot be settled by the Wage Board or by the Government under the Act. Mr. Pai, learned Counsel for the petitioner, was asked to point out any machinery contained in theAct for adjudication of the dispute raised in the instant case, but he was unable to lay his hands on any provision except Section 17. Section 17 deals with the recovery of the amount due by coercive measures as well as the decision of some questions in dispute by labour Court under the Industrial Disputes Act. This provision again points to the fact that the dispute between the parties is to be determined under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and there is nothing contained in Section 17 or any other provision of the Act to debar the reference of the dispute between the parties for adjudication by an Industrial Tribunal or labour Court as the case may be. Again, if the contentions of Mr. Pai were accepted, the provisions of Section 3 of the Act applying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act to the working journalists as it applies to the workman would become redundant. Both the provisions must harmoniously be construed
definition of workman. The Working Journalists (Industrial Disputes) Act 1 of 1955 was passed on March 12, 1955. The object of the Act as given in the objects and reasons are: "One of the matters referred to the Press Commission was the settlement of disputes affecting workingjournalists. The Press Commission examined the position in the light of judicial pronouncements and found that working journalists did not come within the scope of the Industrial DisputesAct." The Commission, however, considered it essential that they should be entitled to the benefits of the procedure for the investigation and settlement of disputes envisaged in that Act and the Bill was designed to achieve the same object by extending the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. The provisions of the Act have given the definition of the working
journalist as employed in, or in relation to, any establishment for the production or publication of a newspaper or in, or in relation to, any news agency. Section 3 of this Act reads: "The provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, shall apply to, or in relation to, working journalists as they apply to, or in relation to workmen within the meaning of that Act." This Act was repealed by theWorking Journalists (Conditions of Service and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 45 of 1953. Section 3 of this Act has maintained the provisions of Section 3 of the Act 1 of 1955. The result is that by a fiction of law, the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act have been extended to and applied to, or in relation to the working journalists, in the same manner and to the same extent as they apply to, or in relation to, workman defined in Industrial Disputes Act. Consequently, the workingjournalists are fully entitled to take advantage of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Actlike any other workman without their being labelled workman as such. The modification of the Industrial Disputes Act in its application to working journalists is indicated by Sub-section
raises a dispute which cannot be settled by the Wage Board or by the Government under the Act. Mr. Pai, learned Counsel for the petitioner, was asked to point out any machinery contained in theAct for adjudication of the dispute raised in the instant case, but he was unable to lay his hands on any provision except Section 17. Section 17 deals with the recovery of the amount due by coercive measures as well as the decision of some questions in dispute by labour Court under the Industrial Disputes Act. This provision again points to the fact that the dispute between the parties is to be determined under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and there is nothing contained in Section 17 or any other provision of the Act to debar the reference of the dispute between the parties for adjudication by an Industrial Tribunal or labour Court as the case may be. Again, if the contentions of Mr. Pai were accepted, the provisions of Section 3 of the Act applying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act to the working journalists as it applies to the workman would become redundant. Both the provisions must harmoniously be construed
No comments:
Post a Comment