Judgment :- Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant was the writ petitioner. The Writ Petition was filed by the appellant, challenging Ext.P1 award of the Labour Court, Ernakulam, setting aside the order of dismissal passed by the appellant against the 1st respondent and ordering his reinstatement with 50% back wages and continuity of service. 2. The main contention raised before the learned Single Judge was that the Labour Court has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter after 2.1.2003, for the reason that with effect from that date Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act (for short "the Act") was amended, conferring jurisdiction on the Co-operative Arbitration Court to consider the disputes mentioned therein. Sub-section (2) of Section 69 clarifies that any dispute between the management of a Society and its employees, arising in connection with their employment, will also come under the purview of a dispute, for the purpose of Section 69 of the Act. In view of the enforcement of the amendment, the Labour Court lost jurisdiction to consider the disputes referred by the Government, it was contended. But, the learned Single Judge took the view that since the dispute was referred as early as in 1996 by the Government to the Labour Court, Ernakulam, the amendment introduced on 2.1.2003 will not affect the jurisdiction of the Labour Court. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition was dismissed. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also the learned Government Pleader. Section 69 of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act reads as follows: "69. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition was dismissed. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also the learned Government Pleader. Section 69 of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act reads as follows: "69. Disputes to be decided by Co-operative Arbitration Court and Registrar:--(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, if a dispute arises,-- (a) among members, past member sand persons claiming through members, past members and deceased members; or (b) between a member, past member or person claiming through a member, a past member or deceased member and the society, its committee or any officer, agent or employee of the society; or (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 (d) between the society and any other society; Or (e) between a society and the members of a society affiliated to it; or (f) between the society and a person, other than a member of the society, who has been granted a loan by the society or with whom the society has or had business transactions or any person claiming through such a person; or (g) between the society and a surety of a member, past member, deceased member or employee or a person, other than a member, who has been granted a loan by the society, whether such a surety is or is not a member of the society; or (h) between the society and a creditor of the society; such dispute shall be referred to the Co-operative Arbitration Court constituted under Sec.70A, in the case of nonmonetary disputes and to the Registrar, in the case of monetary disputes and the Arbitration Court, or the Registrar, as the case may be, shall decide such dispute and no other court or other authority shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or other proceedings in respect of such dispute. (2) For the purposes of sub-section (1), the following shall also be deemed to be disputes, namely:- (a) a claim by the society for any debt or demand due to it from a member or the nominee, heirs or legal representatives of a deceased member, whether such debt or demand be admitted or not; (b) a claim by a surety against the principal debtor, where the society has recovered from the surety any amount in respect of any debt or demand due to it from the principal debtor, as a result of the default of the principal debtor, whether such debt or demand is admitted or not; (c) any dispute arising in connection with the election of the Board or Management or any officer of the society; Explanation:-- A dispute arising at any stage of an election commencing from the convening of the general body meeting for the election shall be deemed to be a dispute arising in connection with the election; (d) any dispute arising in connection with employment of officers and servants of the different classes of societies specified in sub-section (1) of Sec.80, including their promotion and inter se seniority. (3) No dispute arising in connection with the election of the Board of Management or an officer of the society shall be entertained by the Co-operative Arbitration Court unless it is referred to it within one month from the date of the election." (Emphasis supplied) In view of sub-sections (1)(c) and (2)(d), it is clear that any dispute arising in connection with the employment of officers and servants of a co-operative society is a dispute, which can be resolved under Section 69(1). But, the office establishment of a cooperative society is an industry, as defined under Section 2 (j) of the Industrial Disputes Act. So, the dispute regarding denial of employment will be an industrial dispute, as defined under Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The concerned worker can raise it as an industrial dispute under Section 2A thereof. If Section 69 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act was passed with the assent of the President, it may have overriding effect on central enactments, like the Industrial Disputes Act. 4. The concerned worker can raise it as an industrial dispute under Section 2A thereof. If Section 69 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act was passed with the assent of the President, it may have overriding effect on central enactments, like the Industrial Disputes Act. 4. But, the learned Government Pleader told us that the amendment to Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act was notified without obtaining the assent of the President, as contemplated under Article 254(2) of the Constitution of India. If that be so, the amendment to Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act cannot have the effect of overriding the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. Therefore, the Labour Court and the Co-operative Arbitration Court have concurrent jurisdiction to deal with the industrial disputes. In view of the above position, the challenge against Ext.P1 raised by the appellant, on the ground of lack of jurisdiction has been rightly repelled by the learned Single Judge. So, the Writ Appeal fails and it is accordingly, dismissed.