THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.2099 of 2005 Dated: 01.04.2010 Between: Sri Venkateswara Co-operative Sugar Factory Employees Union Rep. by its General Secretary V.Narasimha Reddy. .. Petitioner. And Commissioner & Director of Sugar and Cane Commissioner, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and others. .. Respondents. ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not making payment of minimum bonus to the workers and staff of the 3rd respondent establishment at 8.33% as per the provisions of Section 10 of Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, for the accounting years 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04 onwards, as illegal and arbitrary, and to direct the 3rd respondent establishment to make payment of the said minimum bonus to its workers and staff for the said years, along with interest at 18% per annum, and also continue to make payment of the same as per the provisions of the Act for the future years also. Learned counsel for respondents, while submitting that, in identical circumstances, a Division Bench of this Court passed a common judgment dated 03.02.2003 in W.P.No.16214 of 1994 and batch and Writ Appeal No.536 of 1998 and batch, placed a copy of the said judgment, wherein it was held that the Supreme Court while considering the aspect of exemption of Tamil Nadu Housing Board from the provisions of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 in State of Tamil Nadu v. K.Sabanayagam[1] held that the order granting exemption to T.N.Board from the provisions of the Act is null and void as the employees of the T.N.Board were not given an opportunity to present their case, that Section 36 falls in the category of conditional legislation and that Impugned notification granting exemption has no retrospective effect, and thus, the petitioners in the writ petitions and the respondents in the Writ Appeals were permitted to represent their plea with regard to payment of bonus to the appropriate authority and avail the remedies available to them under law. Liberty was also granted to them to raise all such objections as are raised in the batch of the cases before the concerned authority, and the authority concerned, as and when such objections are raised before it, was directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders, as expeditiously as possible. It was also made clear that if the petitioners in the writ petitions and the respondents in the Writ Appeals would like to approach the Industrial Tribunal, they can do so to seek their remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act. In view of the above and also in view of the fact that an effective and alternative remedy is available to the petitioner under the Industrial Disputes Act, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to raise its dispute before the appropriate authority, and on raising such dispute, the appropriate authority shall consider and pass appropriate orders, as expeditiously as possible. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 01.04.2010 v v [1] (1998) 1 SCC 318