Hon’ble Rajiv Sharma, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.2. By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 14.10.2008 passed by the opposite party No.1-Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.P., Faizabad in Adjudication Case No. 29 of 2004, rejecting the reference of the petitioner.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that on the basis of the order dated 22.11.1999, the Managing Director of the Cane Federation, directed the General Manager, Kisan Sahkari Chini Mill, Sultanpur to retrench the surplus employees. On the basis of the said order dated 22.11.1999, 542 workers were retrenched /terminated. Feeling aggrieved, bunch of writ petitions have been filed before this Court, leading writ petition No. 669 of 2000 (SS). This Court, vide order dated 15.5.2000, allowed the bunch of writ petitions.4. Against the order dated 15.5.2000, General Manager, Kisan Sahkari Chini Mill, Sultanpur filed a special appeal before this Court. A Division Bench of this Court, after considering each and every aspect of the matter, dismissed the special appeal by the order dated 16.5.2001 and upheld the judgment and order dated 15.5.2000 passed by Hon’ble Single Judge. Feeling aggrieved, General Manager, Kisan Sahkari Chini Mill, Sultanpur, filed a special leave petition, which was numbered as Civil Appeal No. 5466 of 2002, before Hon’ble Apex Court. Hon’ble Apex Court, vide order dated 8.10.2003, while allowing the appeal, set-aside the orders dated 15.5.2000 and 16.5.2001 and further directed the parties to raise an industrial dispute for adjudication by Courts constituted under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the direction of Hon’ble Apex Court, the petitioner has raised the dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court, vide order dated 14.10.2008, rejected the reference of the petitioner inter alia on the grounds that U.P. Cooperative Societies is a special Act and U.P. Industrial Disputes Act is General Act and as such, U.P. Industrial Disputes Act is not applicable in the matter of Kisan Sahkari Chini Mill, Sultanpur. He submits that while rejecting the reference of the petitioner, the Labour Court has relied upon the judgment of Ghaziabad Zila Sahkari Bank Limited v. Additional Labour Commissioner and others [2007 AIR SCW 956]. He submits that while rejecting the reference of the petitioner, the Labour Court has relied upon the judgment of Ghaziabad Zila Sahkari Bank Limited v. Additional Labour Commissioner and others [2007 AIR SCW 956]. He submits that Ghaziabad Zila Sahakari Bank Limited (supra) was adjudicated between the employee and employer of the Bank and the Banks are governed by Banking Regulation, whereas Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills, Sultanpur is an industry and as such, the Apex Court relegated the matter to Industrial Tribunal for adjudicating the same.6. It is not in dispute that Labour Court has rejected the reference of the petitioner ignoring the orders passed by the Apex Court.7. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 14.10.2008 is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to the Labour Court to decide the same as per the direction of Hon’ble Apex Court dated 8.10.2003 in Civil Appeal No. 5466 of 2002. Since the matter is lingering since 2004, I hope and trust that Labour Court will make earnest endeavour to decide the matter in accordance with law, expeditiously.(Petition allowed)_