CYRIAC JOSEPH C. J. ( 1 ) THIS Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment dated 24. 10. 2005 in Writ Petition No. 27441/2004. The appellants are respondents in the Writ Petition. ( 2 ) THE main challenge in the Writ Petition was Annexure-'b' dated 24. 6. 2004 issued by the commissioner for Labour, As per Annexure-'b', the Labour Commissioner rejected the petition dated 25. 2. 2004 submitted by the Principal Secretary, Karnataka Milk Federation Employees federation Ltd. , Bangalore for reference of an industrial dispute under the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Commissioner rejected the petition on the ground that in view of a Full Bench decision of the High Court of Karnataka, in Writ Petition Nos. 14792-14804/1998 and the amendment of Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies act, 1959, the dispute between a Co-operative society and its workers will not come within the purview of the Labour Court. According to the Labour Commissioner, the petition dated 25. 2. 2004 sought to raise an industrial dispute between the Co-operative Societies registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 and their employees. It was also stated that such a dispute can be raised only before the Registrar of Co-operative Societies under section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. ( 3 ) LEARNED single Judge has set aside Annexure-'b' endorsement of the Labour Commissioner. According to the learned single Judge, the dispute sought to be raised by the petitioners before the Labour Commissioner does not come under the purview of Section 70 of the Karnataka co-operative Societies Act. The Learned single Judge also held that the Writ Petitioners are still employees of the Contractors and have not yet become the employees of the Co-operative societies and therefore the dispute sought to be raised by the petitioners cannot be construed as a dispute between a Co-operative Society and its employees. In this view of the matter, learned single Judge held that the jurisdiction of the Labour Court or the Industrial Tribunal is not excluded. In this view of the matter, learned single Judge held that the jurisdiction of the Labour Court or the Industrial Tribunal is not excluded. It is also pointed out by the learned single Judge that in the above mentioned decision of the Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court, it was specifically held that when the Karnataka co-operative Societies Act expressly excludes the jurisdiction of the Labour Court and the industrial Tribunal in respect of matters covered under Section 70, the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act stand excluded to that extent only and that in respect of all matters which are not covered under Section 70, the Industrial Disputes Act applies. According to the learned single Judge, since the present dispute is not covered under Section 70 of the Karnataka co-operative Societies Act, the Industrial Disputes Act alone is applicable in the light of the Full bench decision and in terms of Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act itself, though the learned single Judge held that the dispute does not come under the purview of section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act and that the jurisdiction of the Labour court or the Industrial Tribunal is not excluded, learned single Judge has made it clear that the learned single Judge has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the matter. Liberty has been reserved to both the parties to place such additional materials as are necessary before the Labour Commissioner. The Labour Commissioner has been directed to accept the same and thereafter proceed to consider the matter in accordance with law. ( 4 ) HAVING heard learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned Counsel for the respondents and having considered the materials placed on record, we have no hesitation to uphold the view taken by the learned single Judge that the dispute raised by the Writ Petitioners does not come under the purview of Section 70 (2) (d) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act and therefore the jurisdiction of the Labour Court is not excluded. As rightly pointed out by the learned single judge, only a dispute between a Co-operative Society and its employees can be covered by section 70 (2) (d) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. The appellants have no case that the respondents (Writ petitioners) are employees of the appellants. As rightly pointed out by the learned single judge, only a dispute between a Co-operative Society and its employees can be covered by section 70 (2) (d) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. The appellants have no case that the respondents (Writ petitioners) are employees of the appellants. Therefore, the dispute raised by the Writ petitioners cannot be adjudicated under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative societies Act. If the dispute is not the one which cannot be adjudicated under Section 70 of the karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, the dispute can certainly be raised under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. Therefore, the Labour Commissioner was wrong in rejecting the petition dated 25,2. 2004 in refusing to consider the petition under the provisions of the Industrial disputes Act. Learned single Judge has rightly refrained from expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of the Writ petitioners. It is for the authorities under the Industrial Disputes act to consider the merit of the claims. The appellants will get adequate opportunity before such authorities to oppose the claim of the Writ petitioners. No prejudice will be caused to the appellants by the petition dated 25. 2. 2004 being considered by the Labour Commissioner in accordance with the provisions contained in the Industrial Disputes Act. ( 5 ) IT appears that the Writ petitioners had raised an application before the Registrar of co-operative Societies under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act as per annexure-'a' communication dated 10. 6. 2004. The Registrar has refused to entertain the application on the ground that the applicant is not registered under the Karnataka Co-operative societies Act. In view of the finding that the dispute raised by the petitioners does not fall under the purview of Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, the learned single Judge has quashed Annexure-'a' order of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies also. We are also of the view that, though the Registrar was entitled to refuse to entertain the application under section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, he has done so for the wrong reason. In that view of the matter, Annexure-'a' also was liable to be set aside. Hence we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge setting aside Annexure-'a' order. In that view of the matter, Annexure-'a' also was liable to be set aside. Hence we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge setting aside Annexure-'a' order. ( 6 ) FOR the reasons stated above, there is no merit in the Appeal and the Appeal is dismissed.