Sri R. Govinda Raja Setty S/O. V. Rajaiah Setty and Sri Suryanarayana Setty S/O. V. Rajaiah Setty Vs. Viswabharathi House Building Co-operative Society, Rep. by Its President Sri B. Kriishna Bhat, - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- industrial disputes act, 1947. sections 2(s), 33 & industrial disputes (central)rules, 1957, rule 61: [subhash b. adi, j] protected workmen - held, status of being a protected workmen can be conferred only if employee is workman within meaning of section 2(s) of act and rule 61. except in case of dispute 1% of total number of workman employed in establishment is to be recognized as protected workman. merely because appointment order says workmen on promotion as team leader came under category of supervisor would not by itself confer status of manager on the supervisor. what is required to be noticed is actual discharge of function in the capacity of supervisor or in the capacity of manager. more so, when only recommending power to sanction leave is conferred on them and not sanctioning power. granting of e-mail id or recommending for sanction of leave cannot be characterised to say that, they are independently discharging power over some of the employees. 1. these writ appeals are filed by the petitioners in w.p. nos. 6438/2008 and 6439/2008 being aggrieved by the order dated 27.8.2008 wherein the learned single judge of this court has disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the petitioners to approach the concerned registrar of co-operative societies and in turn, directed the registrar to hold enquiry on serving notices to the affected persons and to dispose of the matter in accordance with law, expeditiously.2. the appellants herein filed w.p. nos. 6438-39/2008 seeking for a direction to the respondents to allot a site in iv phase with demarcation of boundaries and number in vishwabharathi housing complex layout measuring 60' x 40' as per law.3. it is averred in the writ petition that petitioners are the members and shareholders of the first respondent-society. their membership is no. 2274 and 2281 respectively. the first respondent is a house building co-operative society under co-operative societies act, 1956 and society engaged in forming a layout under the supervision of bda. the first respondent-society had issued an intimation of allotment of site nos. 196 and 1260 measuring 60' x 80' and 60' x 40' respectively in 3rd phase, girinagar, bangalore-50 on 30-7-1980 and 10-4-1980 respectively and payment was made as per the said letter on 28.7.1986 and petitioners have made payment of rs. 3,73,000/- and rs. 3,66,000/- respectively on various dates as described in para-4 of the writ petition. the first respondent-society in pursuance to an order passed by this court in w.p. no. 12236/2006 and the petitioners being senior members, the first respondent-society has accepted the payment for allotment of site in phase-iv. the petitioners gave representation to bda and to the registrar of cooperative society for immediate interference and confirm the allotment of site to the petitioners. there was no effective steps from bda in this regard and therefore, the writ petitions filed for the above said reliefs. the learned single judge after hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties by order dated 27.8.2008 held that the subject matter of the writ petitions pertain to allotment of site on the basis of membership of the first respondent and petitioners have got effective and efficacious alternative remedy under section 70 of the karnataka co-operative societies act and accordingly relegated the petitioners to the said alternative remedy since disputed question of fact cannot be gone into in the writ petitions and directed the registrar of co-operative societies to dispose of the application that would be filed by the petitioners expeditiously, in accordance with law. being aggrieved by the said order of the learned single judge dated 27.8.2008, these appeals are filed by the writ petitioners.4. we have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned addl. government advocate appealing for the respondents.5. learned counsel appearing for the appellants reiterated the contentions urged before the learned single judge and submitted that allotment is not made in accordance with law and therefore, necessary direction may be issued to the bda. the learned counsel further submitted that if the appellants are relegated to alternative remedy before the registrar of co-operative societies, the allotment that would be made by the society in the meanwhile may be made subject to the result of enquiry by registrar of cooperative society.6. learned addl. government advocate submitted that the subject matter can be decided by the registrar of cooperative societies if effective alternative remedy is provided and therefore, the order passed by the learned single judge is justified and there is no merit in these appeals.7. we have given careful consideration to the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and scrutinised the material on record.8. the material on record would clearly show that the contention of the petitioners is that the first respondent is not making allotment of sites along with the seniority of members. admittedly, petitioners-the appellants herein are members of the first respondent-society and therefore, the dispute between the appellants-members of the first respondent-society can be effectively gone into under the alternative and efficacious remedy provided under the karnataka co-operative societies act and disputed question of fact as to whether allotment is made in accordance with seniority of membership cannot be gone into in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this court at this stage, since the appellants have got effective and efficacious alternative remedy to work out their grievances in accordance with law and the learned single judge has already directed the registrar of co-operative societies to dispose of the matter expeditiously and thereby safe-guarded the interest of the appellants. accordingly, we hold that the impugned order passed by the learned single judge is justified and does not suffer from any error or illegality as to call for interference in this intra court appeal. however, it is made clear that any allotment made by the first respondent-society would be subject to the result of the decision that would be taken by the registrar of co-operative societies as per the directions issued by the learned single judge.9. accordingly, the writ appeals are disposed of on merits. since appeals are disposed of on merits, it is unnecessary to go into the question of delay of 206 days in filing the appeals.