1. This petition is filed for the issue of a writ of mandamus calling for the records in G.O.R. No. 1030, dated 21 April 1964, from the State of Madras and directing the Government to dispose of the matter according to law. On Murugesan who is a member of the petitioner-onion tm employed as the goods section clerk under the Ondiputhur Weavers' Co-operative Production and Sales Society, Ltd., Coimbatore. On 14 July 1955, the society Ponnuswami for shortage of 27 sarees in a parcel to be sent which contained 200 sarees. They filed an appeal under the Madras Shops and Establishments Act, and the order of dismissal was set aside on 31 December 1955. These two workers had been taken back into service as per the compromise arrived at between the parties. The management filed an arbitration case before the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Coimbatore, and the Deputy Registrar passed a decree against Murugesan for a sum of Rs. 286-11-0. dismissed the said Murugesan and one The management directed a show-cause notice against Murugesan as to why he should not be dismissed from service and also demanded the payment of the decree amount. On 1 December 1960 the management Issued another' notice stating that an enquiry would be conducted on 7 December 1960. The worker appeared before the board of directors and submitted a memorandum stating that his revision petition is pending disposal. On 8 December 1960 the order of dismissal was passed against Murugesan. An appeal preferred by him to the board of directors was also dismissed.
2. The revision petition filed by Murugesan against the order of the Deputy Registrar giving a decree for Rs. 286-11-0 was remanded back to the Deputy Registrar. The Deputy Registrar held an enquiry and gave a decree for Rs. 150 against him. The petitioner-union on behalf of the workers took up the matter before the labour officer II, Coimbatore, for conciliation with regard to the reinstatement of the two workers. The labour officer reported failure of conciliation to the Government of Madras. The Government, after taking into consideration all the facts, came to the conclusion that it was not a fit case for reference under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act. In its order the Government stated that it is reported that the charge against the worker S.T. Murugesan of having lost 27 sarees of the society was held proved in the enquiry conducted by the management.
3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that so far as the loss of 27 sarees is concerned, there was an enquiry by the Deputy Registrar which ended in a decree for Rs. 286-11-0 which was ultimately reduced to Rs. 150 which was alleged to have been paid to the society by Murugesan. This allegation that the amount had been paid has not been denied by the society. But whether the decree had been satisfied or not, the fact that the sarees had been lost by the worker had been found against after the enquiry and on this finding the Government was not-willing to make a reference under Section 10(1) of the Act. I am unable to say that the Government failed to perform any statutory duty that it was bound to do. The Government, in the circumstances of the case, entitled to decline to make a reference.
4. The Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.