The main legal point established in the judgment is that when an equally efficacious alternative remedy is available, a writ application may not be entertained by the court.

JUDGMENT :

1. This writ application has been filed in respect of a dispute between the petitioner, a former employee of Burdwan Co-operative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank and the said Cooperative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank. Such a Bank is a primary Co-operative Society under sub section (16) of section 4 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act 2006. The above named Agriculture and Rural Development Bank has been referred to as the Co-operative society thereafter.

2. When this matter was argued at length before me nobody addressed this Court regarding Section 102 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 2006. Subsequently this Court wanted to know from the parties as to their views in respect of the matter in dispute in the back drop of Section 102 of the above Act of 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) which Section lays down that certain disputes are to be filed before Registrar of Co-operative Societies.

3. As the matter relates to a dispute between the Co-operative Society or its board and a past Officer of the Co-operative Society, the specific question which the parties were requested to answer was, whether the dispute as has been raised in the writ application was to be filed before Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Registrar, hereafter, in short) and whether the writ application is entertainable as there is an efficacious alternative remedy.

4. The parties have argued at length in respect of the above question and have filed their written notes of argument referring to some judgments on which they placed reliance at the time of argument on the above question.

5. The petitioner has submitted that the above question was never raised by the respondents and no such ground was taken in the affidavit-in-opposition. It has been further submitted that such question was also not raised when this writ application was initially disposed of on 02.04.2013 and no such question was raised by the Co-operative Society when it filed an appeal against the order dated 02.04.2013. The appeal Court remanded the matter to the writ Court again which is now being heard.

6. The petitioner has also submitted that section 102 of the said Act read with section 4 (25) thereof show that Registrar of Co-operative Societies can settle the dispute which is only civil in nature. The writ application relates to fixation of amount of gratuity and leave salary and these questions are not civil disputes but the same are statutory rights of the employees which are disputes in connection with statutory provision and therefore, such disputes can be raised in writ jurisdiction.

7. The petitioner has further submitted that non-payment of gratuity in terms of the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 as amended from time to time shows that the dispute is in fact unilateral change of service condition under the guise of an agreement dated 30.11.2011 entered into by and between the society and the union of the employees of which the petitioner was a member. As it has been laid down by judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court that change of service condition is not a civil dispute the writ application is maintainable and the Registrar does not have the power to determine entitlement of the Gratuity Act 1972.

8. The petitioner has relied upon the following three judgments;

(i) reported in (Central Provident Fund Commissioner & Anr. -Versus- Modern Transportation Consultancy Service Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., (2008) 4 CalHN 33) to show that the preliminary objection as was not taken at the earliest before a Learned Single Judge, the Division Bench declined to entertain that question;

(ii) reported in (GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE AND ANOTHER -Versus- C.K. RAJAN AND OTHERS, (2003) 7 SCC 546) (paragraph-82). The petitioner has placed reliance upon this judgment to show the view expressed by the Supreme Court for the reason that the question of examining the maintainability of the writ petition as a preliminary issue by the High Court became academi