JUDGMENT : P.K. Misra, J.—The present writ petition has been filed by North Coimbatore Food Corporation of India Workers Labour Contract Co-operative Society Ltd., and Kovai Mavatta Baram Thookkuvoor Pothu Thozhilalar Sangam. 2. It is claimed in the writ petition that the workers represented through the present petitioners were employed through contractors under the second respondent. Subsequently, the workers formed a co-operative society and the work was being allotted to such co-operative society. In 1994, the contract was terminated and in 1995 tender was called for. At that stage, W.P. No. 5950 of 1995, was filed by the petitioners challenging the advertisement, dated May 14, 1995. Even though the writ petition was entertained, learned single Judge did not pass any interim order. The petitioners: filed W.A. No. 654 of 1995. The Division Bench passed an order of status quo on June 6, 1995 and by virtue of such order, the co-operative society was allowed to render the work and accordingly the workmen forming the co-operative society continued as such. Thereafter, the writ petition and the writ appeal were withdrawn. However, subsequently in May 1997, a fresh notification inviting tender was issued and the present writ petition has been filed with a prayer for a direction to the first respondent to take steps u/s 10(1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, and for a direction to absorb all the employees from the date of abolition. An order of status quo has been passed, which is continuing. 3. It is obvious that such a writ petition has been filed keeping in view the decisions of the Supreme Court reported in Gujarat Electricity Board, Thermal Power Station, Ukai Vs. Hind Mazdoor Sabha and Others, AIR 1995 SC 1893 and Air India Statutory Corporation, etc. Vs. United Labour Union and others [overruled], AIR 1997 SC 645 . 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in view of the subsequent decision reported in Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Others etc. etc. Vs. National Union Water Front Workers and Others etc. etc., AIR 2001 SC 3527 , and Nitinkumar Nathalal Joshi and Others Vs. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. and Others, AIR 2002 SC 1444 prayer for abolition of the contract labour system and direction regarding absorption may not be proper. etc. Vs. National Union Water Front Workers and Others etc. etc., AIR 2001 SC 3527 , and Nitinkumar Nathalal Joshi and Others Vs. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. and Others, AIR 2002 SC 1444 prayer for abolition of the contract labour system and direction regarding absorption may not be proper. In the changed circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioners prays that the petitioners may be permitted to invoke appropriate jurisdiction under the Industrial Disputes Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that by virtue of the interim order passed by this Court, the co-operative society has been entrusted with the work and such arrangement may be allowed to continue until the matter is finalised by the appropriate industrial forum. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that in view of the later decision of the Supreme Court overruling the decision reported in Air India Statutory Corporation v. United Labour Union and Others (supra), AIR 1997 SC 645 the question of giving a direction for absorption does not arise. Learned counsel for the respondents has further submitted that the question as to whether there is any industrial dispute or not is a matter of discretion of the appropriate Government, namely the Union of India and such matter has to be left to the Central Government. It is further submitted that even assuming that any dispute is referred to the industrial forum, Food Corporation of India should be allowed to carry on the work through any contractor on the basis of tender. 6. In the present case, the Union of India has been impleaded as respondent No. 1. The matter has remained pending from 1997. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the various decisions of the Supreme Court referred to above, I feel interest of justice would be served by directing the first respondent 10 frame and refer the disputes between the petitioners and the respondent No. 2 to the appropriate industrial forum within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter the industrial forum shall proceed to adjudicate the matter in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months, from the date of receipt of the order of reference. Thereafter the industrial forum shall proceed to adjudicate the matter in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months, from the date of receipt of the order of reference. Having regard to the fact that order of status quo has continued from 1997, the respondent No. 2 is directed to continue with the same arrangement until the matter is decided by the industrial forum. 7. Subject to the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.