1 2025:CGHC:39451 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPL No. 10 of 2015 Ramlakhan Sahu S/o Late Shri Ratiram Sahu Aged About 59 Years R/o Shivnagar, Handipara, Vishwakarma Chowk, PS Aazad Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1 - Danik Navbharat Through Sampadak, Rajbandha Maidan, PS Moudhapara, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Labour Court No.1, Raipur, Through Presiding Officer, Ananad Nagar, PS Telibandha, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. J.K. Gupta, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 07/08/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- 10.1 That the Hon’ble court may kind enough to call the record of the petitioner. 10.2 That the Hon’ble court may be kind enough to issue a appropriate Writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions and to quashed Annexure P-1. 10.3 That the Hon’ble court may be kind enough any appropriate writ, order or direction as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case. 2. Mr. J.K. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner was holding the post of Photo Type Setting Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2025.08.11 20:01:32 +0530 2 Operator (for short ‘PTSO’) under the respondents, and he retired from service on 06.11.2007 after attaining the age of 58 years. He would contend that, according to the provisions of Clause 14-A (1-A) of the Chhattisgarh Industrial Employment (Standing Order) Rules, 1963 (for short ‘Rules, 1963’), the age of the retirement of the petitioner should have been 60 years. He would further contend that the petitioner comes within the definition of ‘Working Journalist’ defined under Section 2(f) of the Working Journalist and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (for short ‘Act, 1955’). He would also contend that the learned Labour Court committed an error of law while dismissing the claim of the petitioner. He would pray to allow this petition. 3. On the other hand, Ms. Nupur Trivedi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, would submit that according to Clause 14-A (1-A) of the Rules, 1963, the age of retirement of other employees than ‘Journalists’ defined under section 2(f) of the Act, 1955 is 58 years and for ‘Working Journalists’, the age of retirement is 60 years. She would refer to Section 2(f) of the Act, 1955, which defines ‘Working Journalist’. She would contend that the petitioner does not come within the definition of ‘Working Journalist’ as he was a PTSO and therefore, he was rightly denied the age of retirement at the age of 60 years by the learned Labour Court. She would submit that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 5. Clause 14-A (1-A) of Rules, 1963, reads as under:- 3 14-A. Retirement.-An employee shall retire from the service of the employer on the date he attains the age of 58 years. He may, however, be retained in service by the employer after the date of attaining the age of 58 years if his services are necessary in the interest of the undertaking but he shall not be retained in service after the age of 60 years: Provided that nothing in this clause shall adversely affect the operation of the terms of any contract, agreement, settlement, or award on this subject, if the age of retirement is not less that 58 years: Provided further that before retiring an employee from the service in accordance with the provisions contained in this Clause, the employer shall give to the said employee at least one month’s intimation in writing of such retirement. However, failure to give such intimation will not entitle the employee to continue in service after attaining the age of retirement. On the employer’s failure to give such intimation, he shall be liable to pay to the employee concerned one month’s wages. (1-A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- clause (1) the age of retirement for working journalists as defined in Section 2 (f) of the Working Journalists and other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (No. 45 of 1955) shall be 60 years. 6. Section 2(f) of the Act, 1955, reads as under:- Section 2. Definitions. 2(f) – “Working Journalist” means a person whose principal avocation is that of a journalist and 6[who is employed as such, either whole-time or part-time, in, or in relation to, one or more newspaper establishment], and includes an editor, a leader writer, news- editor, sub-editor, feature-writer, copy-tester, reporter, correspondent, cartoonist, news-photographer and proof-reader, but does not include any such person who- (i) Is employed mainly in a managerial or administrative capacity; or (ii) Being employed in a supervisory capacity, performs, either by the nature of the duties attached to his office or by reason of the powers 4 vested in him, functions mainly of a managerial nature. 7. From a bare reading of the definition of ‘Working Journalists’, it is clear that post of PTSO does not come within the definition of ‘Working Journalist’, therefore, the provisions of Clause 14-A (1-A) of the Rules, 1963, would not apply to the petitioner who was not working as ‘Working Journalist’ under the respondent. Thus, in my opinion, the learned Labour Court rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner; therefore, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the award passed. 8. Consequently, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti