The main legal point established is that the appropriate Government for a deemed university is determined by its recognition under the Central Government, and the definition of industry under the Industrial Disputes Act applies to entities like the Non-teaching Staff Association.

H. V. G. RAMESH, J, J.

( 1 ) IN this Writ Petition, petitioner has sought for to quash the order of reference dated 8-12-03 passed by the 1st respondent at annexure-A and consequently, the proceedings before the Tribunal in ref. No. 164/03 by issuing writ of certiorari and for such other reliefs.

( 2 ) THIS Court had earlier disposed of this matter on 24-6-05 allowing the Writ Petition and quashing the impugned order of reference made to the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore with a direction to the 1st respondent to make reference to the Industrial Tribunal, Mysore within two months for disposal of the case. Of course, the stand taken by the petitioner therein while disposing of the matter is that petitioner is not an industry and the appropriate Government is the Central government and it is the Industrial Tribunal at Mysore which has territorial jurisdiction and not the Industrial Tribunal at Bangalore. Even the Counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 had no objection to make reference to the Industrial Tribunal, Mysore. However, this order has been challenged before the division bench of this Court in writ Appeal No. 3341/05 wherein the division bench has observed that, the labour Court cannot go beyond the point of reference made by the competent authority since already reference was made by the state Government and while deciding the point of dispute the Industrial tribunal cannot frame an issue with regard to whether the appellant is an industry and whether the appropriate Government to make a reference is the Central Government or the State Government and whether the third respondent/union which is not recognised by the management could have raised a dispute, it is ordered that these are the issues to be considered by the Single Judge and it cannot be decided by the Industrial Tribunal. Accordingly, the earlier order passed by the Learned Single Judge was set aside while remanding the matter back for fresh consideration. Hence, this petition is taken up once again for consideration on the above points.

( 3 ) HEARD the Learned Counsel for the petitioner and the Learned counsel appearing for the respondents and the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the point.

( 4 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the Manipal Academy of Higher education is a deemed university enacted under Section 3 of the university Grants Commission Act of 1956 and it is an Educational institution governed by the guidelines of UGC in terms of memorandum of Association executed by the peitioner under the advice of the University Grants Commission. The provisions of the industrial Disputes Act of 1947 is not applicable to the teaching and non-teaching employees of the petitioner. The petitioner/ University has been revising the pay scales from time to time and emoluments are being paid substantially and one such revision is being made during 1996. During 2002 in addition to normal annual increase in the rates of basic and dearness allowance the emoluments were further hiked to its employees. The 2nd respondent Non-teaching Staff Association has unnecessarily disputed before the Assistant Labour Commissioner regarding the pay revision made by the petitioner in the year 1996 alleging that there is a discrimination in the revision of the pay scales. After holding the conciliation proceedings on several occasions reference was made by the Assistant Labour Commissioner through the State Government to adjudicate the matter by the industrial tribunal. Hence, this petition assailing the jurisdiction of the Assistant Labour commissioner and the State Government in referring the matter to the industrial Tribunal as a matter of reference contending that non teaching employees association of the petitioner university is not an industry and also it is clear from the order of the division bench that these issues are to be considered by this Court.

( 5 ) IT is the submission of the learned Addl. Government advocate that asper the report submitted by the Assistant Labour co

Click Here to Read the rest of this document