Tribunal jurisdiction under service law excluded High Court writ review for daily-wage employees' dispute under the Act.

The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 was treated as a broad exclusion of High Court writ jurisdiction in service disputes covered by the Act. Reading Article 323-A of the Constitution with Sections 14 and 3(q), the Supreme Court held that the Tribunal's jurisdiction is wide and should not be narrowly construed, so a daily-wage employees' dispute falling within that scheme could not be entertained under Article 226. Because the merits had already been settled between the parties, only the forum question remained, and the matter was held to lie before the Administrative Tribunal rather than the High Court.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court had jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to entertain the dispute of daily-wage employees in view of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

Analysis: The controversy on merits had already been settled between the parties, and therefore the claim for equal pay did not survive for adjudication. The remaining question was the jurisdiction of the High Court. Referring to the wide scope of Article 323-A of the Constitution of India and the scheme of Sections 14 and 3(q) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the Court followed the view that the Act covers a wide field and does not warrant a narrow interpretation of the Tribunal's jurisdiction. On that basis, the High Court's writ jurisdiction was held to stand excluded in such matters and the jurisdiction vested in the Administrative Tribunal.

Conclusion: The High Court lacked jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and the matter lay before the Administrative Tribunal under the Act.

---