SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Kar) 240

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ, J.
Indian Coffee Workers’ Co-Operative Society Limited., rep. by its president Sri. A. Chinnappa - Petitioner
Versus
The Senior Labour Inspector, Office Of The Labour Commissioner's and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 22751 Of 2021 (L-RES)
Decided On : 07-02-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri. Somashekar.
For the Respondents: Sri. Bhoje Gouda T. Koller, Sri. K. Subba Rao, Sr. Counsel for Sri. L. Muralidhar Peshwa.

Point of Law: Section 70 of Act deals with a dispute which are to be referred to Registrar for a decision which includes in terms of Section 70(1)(c) of Act, dispute between Society, any officer, agent or employee.

Headnote:

Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 - Section 70, (1), (1)(c), (2) - Minimum Wages Act, 1948 - Section 3 - Payment of Wages Act, 1936 - Co-operative Society - Payment of wages - Claim for minimum wages - Quash impugned order passed by second respondent - Whether order passed by authority under Minimum Wages Act requires interference – In event of employer making payment of minimum wages, no order need to be passed - Para 10.8.

Finding of the Court:

Dispute contemplated under Section 70 of Act is one contemplated under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and not as regards nonpayment of minimum wages - Minimum wages, if not paid, would only give raise to a claim for payment of minimum wages and not a dispute for adjudication - Hon’ble Apex Court was ceased of a dispute between Co-operative Society and a workmen arising out of an industrial dispute, which is not case in present matter - industrial Disputes Act, 1947 does not cover a claim of minimum wages - A claim for minimum wages has to be made under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 - There is no infirmity in order passed by authority under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 requiring interference - Despite sufficient time having been granted, they have been unable to arrive at any settlement and as such, requested Court go ahead with pronouncement of judgment.

Result: Petition dismissed.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs;

a. Quash the impugned order bearing No.VU KAA AA BEM-2/VE PAA KAA / CR-35/2020-21/1948 dated 27.10.2021 passed by the second respondent, at Annexure-R to this writ petition;

b. Declare that the second respondent has no jurisdiction in view of Section 70(1) of the Karnataka cooperative Societies Act on or after 20.06.2000 in respect of petitioner society registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act;

c. This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant time to pay the arrears of Rs.15,85,843/-in 30 equal monthly instalments in view of the financial difficulties faced by the petitioner society;

d. And pass such other appropriate orders as deemed fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The petitioner is a Co-operative Society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act in the year 1957. The petitioner was carrying on the business of running a coffee shop in Bangalore. The said business was going on very well till the year 2016. However, thereafter, it started suffering losses more so on account of Covid 19 as also on account of the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) having taken up the work of redoing Church Street, which had closed the said road for repair for a period of nearly a year preventing the customers from visiting the coffee hotel being run by the petitioner.

3. The petitioner, during this time having closed the said coffee shop had not made payment of the wages and/or contributions as statutorily mandated but had paid only 50% of the same. It is on this allegation that the workmen had once earlier approached the Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies who had passed an order stating that he would not be in a position to pass an order on a representation but however, a properly instituted dispute could be considered.

4. Thereafter, the respondent-workmen approached the authority under the Minimum Wages Act seeking for payment of minimum wages. The said authority, vide its order dated 27.10.2021 upheld the contention of the workmen and directed for payment of minimum wages. It is aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs.

5. Sri.Somashekar, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that:

5.1 the authority under the Minimum Wages Act has no jurisdiction and/or authority to decide any dispute and/or claim made by the workmen as regards the Co-operative Society in view of the amendment which has been brought about to Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 in the year 2000.

5.2 that subsequent to the said amendment, any dispute as regards any claim of an workmen/ employee as regards wages or otherwise would have to be referred to the Registrar for decision and no Civil or Labour or Revenue Court or Industrial Tribunal shall have the jurisdiction to entertain any suit or other proceedings in respect of such dispute.

5.3. In this regard, he relies upon Section 70(1) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, (for short, ‘the Act’) which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference:

70. Dispute which may be referred to Registrar for decision:

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, if any dispute touching the constitution, management or the business of a co-operative society [xxxxx] arises—

(a) among members, past members and persons claiming through a member, past member or

(b) between any member, past members or persons claiming through a member, past members or deceased member, and the society, its [board] or any officer, agent or employee of the society ; or

(c) between the society or its [board] and any past [board], any officer, agent or employee, or any past officer, past agent or past employee or the nominee, heirs or legal representative of any deceased officer, deceased agent or deceased employee of the society ; or

(d) between the society and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top