1974 (4) TMI 104 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Maintainability of the appeal under Article 136.
2. Applicability of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
3. Classification and capacity to pay by the Press Trust of India (PTI).
4. Procedural fairness and natural justice in Wage Board recommendations.
5. Specific objections by Indian National Press.

Detailed Analysis:

Maintainability of the Appeal under Article 136:
The preliminary objection raised by the respondents was that the appeal is not maintainable under Article 136 of the Constitution since the Central Government's order is a piece of subordinate legislation and not a judicial order. The Court noted that the Wage Board's functions could be administrative, judicial, quasi-judicial, or legislative. The Court held that the Wage Board's functions are not necessarily legislative and could be subject to judicial review if proper safeguards are adopted.

Applicability of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution:
The petitioners argued that the Wage Board's recommendations and the Central Government's order violated Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. The Court allowed the substitution of shareholders in place of deceased petitioners to maintain the challenge under Article 19. The Court held that a shareholder could challenge the order if it imposed an unreasonable burden on the company's resources.

Classification and Capacity to Pay by the Press Trust of India (PTI):
The PTI argued that it was discriminated against in the classification and fixation of wages. The Wage Board placed PTI in Class II instead of Class III based on its gross revenue, which PTI contended was arbitrary and without basis. The Court found that the classification was arbitrary and discriminatory, as PTI was placed in a higher category without sufficient justification. The Court noted that the Wage Board failed to consider PTI's financial capacity adequately and imposed a heavy financial burden.

Procedural Fairness and Natural Justice in Wage Board Recommendations:
The PTI argued that the Wage Board recommended wages higher than what the employees had asked for, without giving notice to the employer, thus violating principles of natural justice. The Court agreed, stating that the Wage Board's recommendations were unreasonable and beyond the financial capacity of PTI. The Court emphasized that the Wage Board must consider the representations of both employers and employees and fix wages according to the employer's capacity to pay.

Specific Objections by Indian National Press:
The Indian National Press argued that there was a deficit between its average net profits and the yearly wage burden. The Court found no merit in this argument, noting that the petitioner was placed in the appropriate class based on its gross profits. Therefore, the Court dismissed Writ Petition No. 37 of 1968.

Conclusion:
The Court allowed Writ Petition No. 40 of 1968 by PTI, striking down the Central Government's order dated October 27, 1967, as it applied to PTI. The Court directed PTI to pay wages agreed upon with its employees' union until new wages are fixed by another Wage Board. No orders were made in Civil Appeal No. 2102 of 1968, and no costs were awarded.