Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

18. So long as we have examined the decision relied on by Mr. Verma and cited above, has not diluted the proposition laid down in paragraph 17 of the Vaish Degree College (supra). Now Mr. Verma had relied on the decision in the case of Premier Automobiles v. Kamlakar Shantaram Wadke. AIR 1975 SC 2238. This decision was given on August 26. 1975, while that of Vaish Degree College was given on December 12. 1975. Therefore. Premier Automobiles (supra), did not have occasion to consider the view taken in the case of Vaish Degree College (supra). Both these decisions are of co-ordinate Bench of equal strength by the Apex Court. At the same time, though the decision in Vaish Degree College was taken after the decision of Premier Automobiles. But the decision of Premier Automobiles was not considered in Vaish Degree College. in Premier Automobiles (supra), it had proceeded to lay down that in India under Section 9 of the Code, the Courts have subject to certain restriction of jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance are expressedly or impliedly barred. It had summarized the situation in paragraph 23 after having discussing various decisions in the following manner. The principles applicable to the jurisdiction of the civil court in relation to an industrial Dispute were laid as follows :

20. If the proposition laid down in Premier Automobiles and those In Valsh Degree College are compared together in that event, it would be apparent that both have somewhere laid down the exceptions in regard to which civil court may have jurisdiction in enforcing contract of employment which is otherwise barred under Section 14 of the Specific Relief Act. While Vaish Degree College had dealt with the case covered under Section 311 of the Constitution of India and those under the Industrial Law. It had stepped further in respect of the case where the employer being a statutory authority had breached or violated the mandatory provisions of statute, can very well be maintained before a civil court claiming the relief which is otherwise available only before the Industrial Tribunal. Whereas Premier Automobiles had dealt with the question within the exception (ii) provided in paragraph 17 of Vaish Degree College and had elaborated the same. Mr. Ashok Bhushan has based his claim on exception fiit) of paragraph 17 of Valsh Degree College (supra) and he had never argued that his case falls within the exception (it) of paragraph 17 of Vaish Degree College (supra). Therefore. It is not necessary to elaborate the proposition as has been laid in the Premier Automobiles (supra). On the other hand. Premier Automobiles virtually circumscribes exception (U) of paragraph 17 of the Vaish Degree College to the extent as it has laid down in paragraph 24 adding to the principle (2) laid down in paragraph 23 of Premier Automobiles. Where despite a right both giving rise to a right under the general law as well as the industrial law to the extent that if there is an Industrial law. It has to be before the Industrial Tribunal not before the civil court. Thus, Premier Automobiles has again narrowed down the scope to the extent as has been held in exception (iii) of paragraph 17 of Vaish Degree College (supra). Thus Premier Automobiles has not dealt with the question which Is covered under the third exception of Vaish Degree College (supra).

24. A plain reading of the said proposition shows that when a dispute arises from general law of contract, the same may very well be maintained before the civil court even though the same may constitute an Industrial dispute. So far as the other proposition laid down therein in sub-paragraphs 2. 3, 4. 5. 6 and 7 are concerned, may not be of interest at the moment. In as much as in the present case, the dispute does not arise out of any breach of Industrial Standing Order. It is also not an observance or enforcement of any rights or obligation created under the Industrial Disputes Act and that the Regulation cannot be treated to be at par with Industrial Standing Order bereft of statutory force as has been held in the said decision with regard to the latter one. Thus, even the decision in the case of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (supra) has also not diluted exception (iii) of Vaish Degree College as laid down In paragraph 17 thereof. On the other hand. It provides that even if it is an industrial dispute, still then civil, court might have Jurisdiction. However, it has not gone into the question as to whether any such civil suit the claim for reinstatement and back wages could be maintained or not, Though, however, this was so held In paragraph 29 of the said decision but yet that was on the facts and circumstances of the case wherein the Court was called upon to decide the issue on the basis of Industrial Standing Order not on the basis of any other provisions. Thus, fn order to construe the impact of exception (iii) of Vaish Degree College (supra), this decision will not help us since the decision of Vaish Degree College (supra) was not taken into consideration in the said case.

26. This discussion as made above, makes it clear that a suit for enforcement of a contract of employment is not maintainable before the civil court if the relief is of reinstatement or back wages on account of assailing an order of termination. But there are some exceptions as laid down In Voish Degree College (supra). So far as the rights arising out of general law also constituting Industrial Disputes are concerned, the choice is of the Suitor, though in Jitendra Nath Biswas (supra). It has been specifically pointed out that civil court cannot grant relief for re-instatement and back wages. The decision in Premier Automobiles has not indicated as to what relief could be had in a suit for enforcement of a contract of employment when the right though flowing from general law yet constituting Industrial Dispute. One of the view taken by the Apex Court is that in such civil suits damages could be asked for but not re-instatement and back wages. Though the decision in Vaish Degree College (supra) has been reiterated in some of the cases and had been followed but it has not been discerned from. On the other hand, there is no question of diluting the exception (iii) in the Vaish Degree College (supra) since this exception had never been considered by any of the other judgment by the Apex Court. Leading cases being that of Premier Automobiles had no occasion to deal with Vaish Degree College (supra) being a Judgment delivered earlier than the later. Similarly Rajasthan State Transport Corporation have also not considered the Vaish Degree College. This had not dealt with the exception mentioned In Vaish Degree College.