Illangakoon V. Bogollagama Et Al.,

 

1948 Present : Gratiaen J.
 
ILLANGAKOON, Petitioner, and BOGOLLAGAMA et al,
Respondents.
 
S. C. 403-Application for a Writ of Certiorari

Writ of Certiorari-Manager of Co-operative Store-Claim for value of goods en trusted -Claim made after resignation of manager-Arbitration- Jurisdiction of arbitrator-Co-operative Societies Ordinance-Chapter 107-Rule 29- Section 45.
 
Petitioner was employed as manager of a Co-operative Store. After his resignation he received a summons to appear before the first respondent who claimed to be appointed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies under rule 29 of the rules framed under section 37 of Ordinance No. 34 of 1921, to arbitrate upon an alleged dispute between the Society and the petitioner in respect of the Society's claim for a sum of money being the value of certain goods entrusted to him as manager. On an application for Writ of Certiorari to quash the proceedings before the arbitrator as being in excess of jurisdiction-
 
Held, (i) that rule 29 of the rules framed under section 37 of Ordinance No. 34 of 1921 did not permit the reference to arbitration of a dispute between a Co-operative Society and one of its ex-officers ; (ii) that even if the petitioner was a member the dispute in question was not one resulting from his membership ; (iii) that the word officer in section 45 (i) (c) of Chapter 107 did not include an ex-officer and that the dispute could not have been referred to arbitration even under that provision of the Ordinance.

APPLICATION for a writ of certiorari.

H. W. Jayewardene, for the petitioner.
 
E, B. Wikramanayake, for the 1st and, 2nd respondents.

V Tennekoon, Crown Counsel, for the 3rd respondent.

Cur. adv. vult.

 May 27, 1948. Gratiaen J.-
 
The petitioner was employed as Manager of the Kurunegala Co-operative Stores Society Limited (a society duly registered under the Cooperative Societies Ordinance, Chapter 107) for a period of four months until he resigned his post with effect from September 30, 1944. Over a year later, on November 15, 1945, he received what purported to be a summons to appear before the 1st respondent, C. R. Bogollagaina, who claimed to have been appointed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies to arbitrate upon an alleged dispute between the Society and the petitioner in respect of the Society's claim to receive from the petitioner " a sum of Rs. 2,207.15 being the value of goods entrusted to him as manager between June 1,1944, and September 30,1944, and not accounted for. " It is not denied that this was the first intimation which the petitioner had of the Society's claim.
 
It was stated in the summons that the 1st respondent would function as arbitrator " under Rule 29 of the rules framed under section 37 of the Co-operative Societies Ordinance, No. 34 of 1921 ". This Ordinance was not in operation at the relevant date except in so far as it was kept alive for certain purposes under the provisions of the later Ordinance No. 16 of 1930 (Chapter 107) which provided, inter alia, by section 52 (2) that all rules made under the earlier Ordinance should continue in force until new rules were made under the new Ordinance in substitution for them. I will assume for the purposes of this application that Rule 29 under which the 1st respondent claimed jurisdiction to function, as an arbitrator was in operation at the relevant date. The effect of this rule was that any dispute concerning the business of a Co-operative Society between " members or past members of the Society....or between a member or past member and the committee (I quote only the relevant words) shall be referred to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies." The Registrar was further empowered, if he thought fit, to appoint an arbitrator to decide the dispute, in which event an appeal from the arbitrator's award would he to the Registrar within one month of the date of the award. It

Click Here to Read the rest of this document