INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS MANAGER MADURAN COATS LTD Vs. JAYARAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Management has filed this revision against the order passed in I. A. No. 865 of 2004 in O. S. No. 116 of 2003. The suit was filed by the first respondent for a declaration that the order of demotion passed by the petitioners on February 4. 2002 is not valid and a direction to the petitioners to restore him in the same post as before. The petitioners filed their written statement and raised a plea inter alia that the matter related to an industrial dispute and must be decided before the forum constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act and therefore, the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to try the suit. Therefore, the petitioners filed LA. No. 865 of 2004 for raising a preliminary issue regarding jurisdiction. The trial Court elaborately considered the matter and came to the conclusion that the preliminary issue with regard to jurisdiction must be answered in favour of the plaintiffs/respondents. Against that this revision is filed.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners would refer to the decisions Rajasthan State road Transport Corporation and another v. Krishna Kant, AIR 1995 SC 1715 : 1995 (5)SCC 75 : 1995-11- LLJ-728; Madura Coats ltd. , Papanasam Mills Post, Vikramasingapuram, ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District by its general Manager and another v. Devadoss sathraj 2003-III-LLJ- 1132 (Mad) and Tamil nadu Cement Corporation Ltd. and Jabamalai and others, 1996-III-LLJ (Suppl)-471 and premier Automobiles Ltd. v. Kamlakar shantaram Wadke and Others, AIR 1975 SC 2238 : 1976 (1) SCC 496 : 1975-II-LLJ-445 to support their case.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the first respondent on the other hand would submit that it is only if the dispute is one under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Civil Court remedy is barred, but whereas demotion has not been enumerated as a dispute covered by section 2-A and therefore, the first respondent was entitled to file a civil suit for his relief. In support of his contention, the learned counsel relied on the decision Thirupattur Co-operative sugar Mills Ltd. and S. Sivalingam, 2003-II-LLJ-231 (Mad ).