The main legal point established in the judgment is that the jurisdiction of the Registrar under the Co-operative Societies Act is limited to matters ordinarily and normally cognizable by civil courts, and disputes regarding seniority and promotion, in the absence of specific rules or bye-laws, cannot be subject to arbitration by the Registrar.

1. The appeal is against the decision of a learned judge of this Court in O. P. No. 363 of 1973 reported in 1975 KLT. 460. In view of the importance of the question raised the matter was directed to be placed before a Full Bench. The learned judge dismissed the writ petition to quash Ext. P1 Award of the Registrar, confirmed on appeal by Ext. P2 order of the Co-operative Appellate Tribunal. The question relates to a dispute as to the seniority and promotion as between the writ petitioner-appellant and the 4th respondent. The Committee of the Kuttipuram Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. (referred to for short as the Society) promoted the appellant as Assistant Accountant on 1 51969. The 4th Respondent thereupon submitted a petition to the Committee complaining against the said promotion. The Committee by an order (referred to in Ext. P1 as Ext. Cl) referred the matter to the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The Deputy Registrar after considering the services and qualifications of the two candidates gave his opinion (referred to in Ext. P1 as C2) that the 4th Respondent was to be promoted in preference to the appellant. In pursuance of this opinion, the Committee reverted the appellant and promoted the 4th Respondent on 1 11970. The appellant put in a petition to the Committee for re-consideration. The Committee re-considered and created a fresh post for the appellant and gave seniority to the appellant. The matter went up again before the Deputy Registrar for re-consideration. After considering the matter in detail and on the merits, the Deputy Registrar passed Ext. P1, order by which he ordered that the Resolution of the Committee dated 1011970 be rescinded and the direction Ext. C2 upheld. He also

ordered that the 4th respondent is senior in rank to the appellant. This order was confirmed on appeal by the Appellate Tribunal in Ext. P2 order. The appellant's writ petition was to quash these orders.

2. Before the learned judge the main question that was canvassed was that the jurisdiction of the Registrar to arbitrate under S.69. is regard to the matter referred was not attracted and therefore had not been properly invoked. The question depends upon the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act. S.2(1) of the Act and S.69(c) read:

"2(i) "Dispute" means any matter touching the business, constitution, establishments or management of a society capable of being the subject of litigation and includes a claim in respect of any sum payable to or by a society, whether such claim be admitted or not." (underlining ours)

"69. Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force if a dispute arises (a) and (b) xx xx xx

(c) between the society or its committee and any past committee, any officer, agent or employee, or any past officer, past agent or past employee, or the nominee, heirs or legal representatives of any deceased officer, deceased agent or deceased employee of the society; or

xx

such dispute shall be referred to the Registrar for decision, and no court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or other proceeding in respect of such dispute".

The pattern of these provisions is somewhat different from what has till recently been followed under the provisions of the Co-operative Societies' Acts, where almost uniformly, the Registrar's jurisdiction related, broadly speaking, to matters touching the business of the Society, without any independent definition of the term 'dispute'. Under the present Act of 1969 while the requirement of a 'dispute touching the business of the Society' is undoubtedly indicated, the definition makes it clear that the 'dispute' may touch the business, constitution, establishments or management of a Society etc. The argument advanced before the learned judge, based on the trend of opinion rendered with respect to the pattern of the provisions of the various Co-operative Societies Acts, till then in force, was that a dispute regarding service conditions, promotion a