GOVINDA KONAR Vs. MURUGAN TRANSPORTS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a civil revision petition filed against the decree and judgment of the learned sub ordinate judge of Dindigul in S. C. S. No. 134 of 1952.

(2.) THE facts are:-The plaintiff was employed under the defendant. He was dismissed from service on 25 January 1949 on account of his having participated in a strike. On the complaint by the employee that he was unjustly dismissed, there was an enquiry by the industrial tribunal, Madurai. The tribunal decided that the dismissal of the plaintiff was unjustified and directed his reinstatement, but the order of reinstatement was silent about the arrears of pay. In these circumstances the plaintiff filed a suit for arrears of salary and it was resisted by the employer on two grounds, viz. (a) on the ground of jurisdiction and (b) limitation.

(3.) THE learned subordinate judge held that he had jurisdiction to go into the controversy because though the order of the industrial tribunal was silent about the arrears of pay till reinstatement from the date of dismissal, the word "reinstate" as defined in the Oxford dictionary means neither more or less than "restore to, replace in lost position, privileges, etc. " and therefore "reinstatement" should necessarily include that the plaintiff must get back his pay. On the point of limitation he held that the article of the Limitation Act applicable was Article 7 and that this suit filed in 1952 in regard to a dismissal on 25 January 1949 and an award on 25 May 1949 was hopelessly barred by time. He therefore dismissed the suit with costs. The defeated plaintiff files this civil revision petition.