Supreme Court Lifts Stay On Labour Court Proceedings Involving HT Media Private Limited

While staying the impugned order, the Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma also marked that it would be open for the Labour Court to proceed with the reference and decide the same in accordance with the law. The case is next likely to be listed on February 23, 2023. 

The origin of the controversy is an order of reference dated 14.08.2017 by which the Government of NCT of Delhi, through the Deputy Labour Commissioner, New Delhi District, referred the industrial dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.2 (HT Media) to the Labour Court for adjudication.

The petitioner sought revised wages in terms of Majithia Wage Board Recommendations. It may be noted that Majithia Wage Board submitted its recommendations for working journalists and non-journalist newspaper employees in newspaper establishments with the revised scale of wages and allowances. The same was accepted and notified by the government on 11th November 2011.

To refer the matter to the labor Court, the commissioner exercised its power under Section 17(2) of the Working Journalist and Other Newspaper Employees (Condition of Service and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1955 (WJ Act).

Aggrieved by the same, HT Media approached the High Court. Therein, among others, the Media Company argued that Dhakad had attained superannuation and thus, had retired. Further, after about two years, 2016 he belatedly raised the industrial dispute. Apart from this, they also submitted that Dhakad was not at all a workman or even an employee covered under the provisions of the WJ Act. He was working as a manager. Placing its reliance on the definition of non-journalist under WJ Act, the company submitted that it does not include the person employed mainly in a managerial and administrative capacity.

The Counsel for HT Media also challenged the reference order on the ground that the Deputy Labour Commissioner has exercised its powers under Section 17(2) of WJ Act for which he was not delegated. Thus, it was averred that the reference was made without any authority or jurisdiction.

In view of these facts and circumstances, the Delhi High Court granted a stay of proceedings before the concerned Labour Court till the next date of hearing.

Advocate on Record Rahul Shyam Bhandari appeared for the petitioner.

Case Title: RABEENDRA KUMAR DHAKAD v. HT MEDIA LTD & ANR., Diary No.- 51717 - 2023

Click here to read/ download the order