PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK SERVICES Vs. JASPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition is directed against the Order of the Sub Judge, 1st Class, Amritsar dated October 30, 1991, whereby the preliminary issue with regard to the fact as to whether the jurisdiction of the Civil Court was barred in view of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act has been held in favour of the workman and against the employer, the present petitioner.

(2.) THE case of the workman-respondent before the trial Court was that he was entitled to the enhanced rate of subsistence allowance as he had remained under suspension for an inordinately long period. The objection taken by the employer that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction in the matter, was repelled by the impugned order. The Court found, after considering the judgments cited by the parties, that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court was not barred and it was open to the workman to choose his remedy either in the Civil Court or before the Industrial Court or Tribunal but once having made an option, he could not thereafter change his mind and opt for the other.

(3.) IT has been urged by Mr. S. S. Nijjar, Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, on the strength of the judgment reported as Jitendra Nath Biswas v. Empire of India and Ceylon Tea Co, (1989-II-LLJ-572) and a single Bench judgment of this Court reported as Punjab National Bank v. Raj Kumar Duggal 1991 (1) S. L. R. 740, that the only remedy available to a workman to seek redress was under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 hereinafter called the 'act' and the jurisdiction of the Civil Court was emphatically barred.