HASSAN CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS SOCIETIES UNION LIMITED, INDUSTRIAL AREA, B.M. ROAD, HASSAN, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR Vs. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MYSORE REGION, MYSORE- 570001 AND SRI. SUBBAIAH, S/O. LAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner is a co -operative Society registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Co -operative Societies Act. 1959. (Hereinafter referred to as the 'KCS Act', for brevity). The second respondent herein has raised a dispute under Section 70 of the KCS Act before the first respondent herein and the same is pending. The second respondent was working as an Accounts Superintendent, for the petrol bunk section of the petitioner society. He was also entrusted with duties pertaining to the Marketing Section of the petitioner. It transpires that the second respondent was said to have committed certain irregularities in the performance of his duties. A charge -sheet was issued alleging misappropriation of funds of the petitioner, by the second respondent. An enquiry was conducted pursuant to the same and on the basis of the report of the enquiry officer and after complying with other mandatory processes, had imposed the punishment of dismissal against the second respondent. The dispute above referred, is raised challenging the order of dismissal. The petitioner is contesting the proceedings pending before the first respondent. The petitioner has relied on the enquiry proceedings conducted against the petitioner to defend its action. The petitioner has sought that the question of validity of the domestic enquiry held against the second respondent be taken up as a preliminary issue - and in the event of the first respondent, holding the issue against the petitioner, then the petitioner be permitted to prove the charges afresh by leading evidence. The first respondent has framed the following six issues, as arising for consideration in the pending dispute.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the workman, respondent no.2, on the other hand, would contend that from a reading of Sections 70, 71 and 117 of the KCS Act and Rule 31 of the KCS Rules, it is the procedure prescribed hereunder and the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which would govern the proceedings and would contend that with the ouster of jurisdiction of the Labor Courts and Industrial Tribunals in respect of those disputes that Would have earlier been construed as Industrial disputes, would have to be adjudicated according to the procedure that governs the adjudication of all disputes under Section 70 of the KCS Act and there is no compulsion on the part of the Registrar to import any special procedure, in the absence of any mandate in this regard. It is further contended that the workman who is terminated from his employment is without any assured source of livelihood and any delay in the adjudication of the dispute further prolongs the agony of the workman. It is contended that the strategy of the petitioner is only to delay the proceedings in seeking to raise a controversy as regards the so -called significance of the preliminary issue.