1969 (4) TMI 108 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal under the Industrial Disputes Act.
2. Interpretation of Section 61 of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act.
3. Competence of the Registrar to decide disputes related to conditions of service.
4. Validity of the reference to the Industrial Tribunal for issues related to transfers of employees.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal under the Industrial Disputes Act:
The primary issue in these appeals is whether the jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal to adjudicate on the industrial dispute referred to it under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act was barred by the provisions of Section 61 of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act. The Tribunal and the High Court both rejected the plea taken by the Banks, expressing the view that the disputes referred to the Tribunal were not capable of being decided by the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies under Section 61 of the Act. Consequently, the reference to the Industrial Tribunal under the Industrial Disputes Act was deemed competent.

2. Interpretation of Section 61 of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act:
Section 61 of the Act stipulates that any dispute touching the constitution, management, or business of a society, other than a dispute regarding disciplinary action taken by the society against a paid employee, must be referred to the Registrar for decision. The Banks argued that the language of Section 61 was wide enough to cover the disputes referred to the Tribunal, as they touched the business of the co-operative societies. However, the Court, referencing a recent decision in *The Deccan Merchants Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. Messrs Dalichand Jugraj & Others*, held that the term "business" in this context refers to the actual trading or commercial activities of the society, not the conditions of service of its employees. Therefore, the disputes related to alteration of conditions of service could not be referred to the Registrar under Section 61.

3. Competence of the Registrar to decide disputes related to conditions of service:
The Court noted that the Registrar, under Section 62(4) of the Act, is mandated to decide disputes in accordance with the provisions of the Act, the Rules, and the bye-laws. The Registrar could not alter conditions of service laid down in the bye-laws, as any alteration would require a change in the bye-laws themselves. Since the Registrar's powers are limited by the Act, he is not competent to grant the reliefs claimed by the workmen, which pertain to altering conditions of service.

4. Validity of the reference to the Industrial Tribunal for issues related to transfers of employees:
The Court did not find it necessary to address the competence of the reference to the Industrial Tribunal for issues related to the transfers of employees, as this point was not raised in the petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court. The competence of the reference to the Industrial Tribunal as a whole was challenged, and thus, the Court did not need to decide whether specific issues within the reference were competently referred.

Conclusion:
The appeals were dismissed, and the decision of the High Court, which upheld the jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal to deal with the industrial dispute referred to it, was affirmed. The Court held that the disputes related to alteration of conditions of service could not be referred to the Registrar under Section 61 of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, and the Industrial Tribunal was competent to grant the reliefs sought in the reference.