SRI DASMESH ACADEMY ANANDPUR SAHIB, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL Vs. SRI DASMESH ACADEMY KARMACHARI UNION, ANANDPUR SAHIB, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY SHRI JANAK RAJ AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India prays for issuance of directions to the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Ropar to take up the Civil Suit titled as Sri Dasmesh Academy, Anandpur Sahib v. Sri Dasmesh Academy Karamchari Union, Anandpur Sahib and others. It has also been prayed that the Civil Judge be further directed to dispose of the application for issuance of ad-interim injunction filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity the Code).

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff-petitioner-Sri Dasmesh Academy, Anandpur Sahib (for brevity the Academy) has filed a civil suit for permanent injunction retraining the defendant-respondents from interfering or obstructing the ingress or egress of students, employees, staff and executives who are carrying out their studies and duties in the Academy. A further prayer has been made to the effect that defendant-respondents be retrained from holding demonstrations and shouting slogans within the radius of 300 Mts. of the boundaries of the Academy and also not to interfere in its normal functioning in any manner whatsoever. The averments made by the plaintiff- petitioner shows that on 4.2.2003 a decision for retrenchment of the surplus staff of the Academy was taken as it was undergoing financial crisis. Defendant-respondent Nos. 2 to 21 who are Class IV employees of the Academy have been served with three months notices dated 19.5.2003 for dispensing with their services and it is claimed that this decision is based on the principle of last come first go. The issuance of retrenchment notices resulted into resentment amongst the defendant-respondent Nos. 2 to 21 who held demonstrations by forcibly entering the office of the Vice Principal. The allegations are that defendant-respondents threatened the Vice Principal with dire consequences if the notices were not withdrawn. They have been holding demonstrations and shouting slogans. Employees Union, defendant-respondent No. 1 issued a letter on 20.6.2003 threatening to hold a demonstration on 2.7.2003 and 13.7.2003 in case the notices issued were not withdrawn. The matter has been reported to the police vide DDR No. 24 dated 20.6.2003. It is apprehended that defendant-respondents would indulge in slogans shouting, and violence after the Academy reopens. The Academy was to reopen on 14.7.2003 which was post-poned to 28.7.2003. The suit has been filed with the afore mentioned averments alongwith an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code. The suit was presented on 11.7.2003 during the vacations and it was registered. Notice of the suit as well as of the application was issued for 19.7.2003. The case was adjourned to 22.7.2003. The learned counsel has stated that hearing of the case is now fixed for 4.8.2003.

(3.) Shri I.P. Singh, learned counsel has argued that as the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Anandpur Sahib is on leave from 21.7.2003 to 26.7.2003 and therefore the application for issuance of ad-interim injunction was not taken up on 2.7.2003 and was adjourned to 4.8.2003. According to the learned counsel the Academy is to reopen on 28.7.2003 and the students as well as the staff has to report on 27.7.2003. As the Civil Judge is on leave upto 26.7.2003, the matter requires urgent attention because as functioning of the Academy would be paralysed which is to reopen on 28.7.2003. Learned counsel has further submitted that the suit be transferred to the Court of Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Ropar who had initially heard the case on 19.7.2003.