INDIAN OXYGEN LTD Vs. GANGA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner is Indian Oxygen Limited, Madras, under whom the respondent herein is an employee, on 7. 4. 1988, the petitioner company served a charge memo and placed the respondent under suspension for certain misconduct on his part, on which he sent a reply on 11. . 4. 1988. THEreafter, one Mr. Madhavaiah was appointed as enquiry Officer, on completion of the enquiry on 2. 12. 1988, he submitted a report and on the basis of that report, a show cause notice had been issued as to why he should not be dismissed from service. At this stage, he filed original Suit No. 188 of 1989 on the file of learned District Munsif , Poonamallee for the relief of declaration and injunction. He also filed LA. No. 393 OF 1989 and obtained ad-interim injunction. After enquiry, ad-interim injunction granted earlier was made absolute. It is this order that is being challenged in the civil Revision Petition.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would make a seathing attack as to the sustainability of this order made by the Court below by urging the following points for consideration: 1. The pleadings of the respondent in the plaint, if scanned with a little bit of care and caution, would point out that the grievance of complaint, if any he had against the petitioner company, was that the domestic enquiry instituted against him is contrary to the Standing Orders of the Company and in that view of the matter, it will fall within the ambit and scope of Items 1 and 2 of Second Schedule to the Industrial disputes Act, 1947 (for short'the Act'; )and consequently, the Civil Court' s Jurisdiction is barred. 2. The order passed as such by the Court below is clearly without jurisdiction tant a -mounting to abuse of process of law and therefore such an Order, which is a nullity, cannot be allowed to stand and the interests of justice require this Court, in exercise of the powers of revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure as well as in exercise of the power of superintendence over all subordinate Courts under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to interfere and set at naught the consequences flowing from such an order.

(3.) IN the backdrop of the principles enunciated by the aforesaid two decisions, an approach may be made to resolve the tangle in the instant case, in the sense of arriving at a conclusion as to whether the reliefs prayed for by the respondent would fall within the domain of the forums created under the provisions of the Act or otherwise it would fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Civil Court. For determination of this question, a scanning of the pleading set out by the respondent in his plaint as well as in the affidavit filed in support of the interlocutory application for the releif of injunction is necessary. IN the concluding paragraph of the plaint, it is specifically averred as follows: 'hence the plaintiff is obliged to file this suit for a declaration that the charge sheet issued to him, the appointment of an enquiry officer are illegal, inoperative and without jurisdiction Contrary to the Standing orders of the Company and for a permanent injunction restraining the Defendant Management from dismissing the Plaintiff from services, (underlining is mine)'