Case Note & Summary
Background: The appeals arose from civil suits filed by workmen of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, a statutory corporation constituted under the Road Transport Corporations Act, 1950. The workmen, who were governed by certified Standing Orders framed under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, were dismissed from service after domestic enquiries on charges of misconduct. They filed civil suits seeking declarations that the termination orders were illegal and invalid and that they must be deemed to have continued in service with all consequential benefits. The Corporation resisted the suits contending that the civil court had no jurisdiction to entertain them. Facts: The trial court decreed the suits in favour of the workmen. The Corporation's appeals before the District Judge and second appeals before the High Court were dismissed. The Corporation then appealed to the Supreme Court. A two-judge Bench of the Supreme Court agreed with the decision in Jitendra Nath Biswas v. M/s. Empire of India and Ceylone Tea Co. that the civil court had no jurisdiction, but in view of a conflicting order dated October 18, 1989 in SLP(C) No.9386 of 1988 holding a similar civil suit maintainable, referred the appeals to a three-judge Bench. Legal Issues: The central question was whether a suit of this nature is maintainable in a civil court or whether the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred by virtue of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 read with the Standing Orders Act, 1946. A related issue was the nature and character of certified Standing Orders and whether they have statutory force. Arguments: The Corporation contended that the workmen's only remedy was to approach the Labour Court under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, relying on Premier Automobiles Ltd. v. Kamlekar Shantaram Wadke and Jitendra Nath Biswas. The workmen argued that certified Standing Orders have statutory force and their violation enabled the civil court to decree reinstatement, relying on Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagat Ram. Court's Analysis: The Supreme Court examined Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which confers jurisdiction on civil courts subject to express or implied bar. It reviewed the scheme of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, including definitions of industrial dispute and workman, provisions for conciliation, adjudication, and powers of Labour Courts and Tribunals under Sections 10, 10A, 11, 11A, and 33C. It also considered the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, particularly Section 13A, which provides for reference of questions as to application or interpretation of standing orders to Labour Court. The Court held that certified Standing Orders are not in the nature of delegated or subordinate legislation and do not acquire statutory force upon certification, though they are binding conditions of service. The Court concluded that disputes relating to termination of workmen are industrial disputes and must be adjudicated under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the civil court's jurisdiction is impliedly barred. Decision: The Supreme Court held that civil court has no jurisdiction to entertain suits by workmen challenging termination orders after domestic enquiries, as the dispute is an industrial dispute and remedy lies under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Certified Standing Orders do not have statutory force. The appeals filed by the Corporation were allowed and the civil suits were dismissed.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Jurisdiction of Civil Court - Implied Bar - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 9; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Sections 2(k), 10, 11A - Suit by workman challenging termination after domestic enquiry - Dispute relating to termination of workman is an industrial dispute and remedy lies before Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal - Held that civil court jurisdiction is impliedly barred when the dispute is an industrial dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. (Paras Not mentioned) B) Labour Law - Certified Standing Orders - Nature and Statutory Force - Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, Sections 3, 13A - Certified Standing Orders do not have statutory force or character of delegated/subordinate legislation but are binding conditions of service - Violation of Standing Orders does not automatically enable civil court to grant reinstatement - Held that the standing orders are not statutory in nature. (Paras Not mentioned) C) Labour Law - Industrial Dispute - Definition and Adjudication - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Sections 2(k), 10, 11A, 33C - Dispute between employer and workman connected with employment or non-employment or terms of employment is an industrial dispute - Machinery under Industrial Disputes Act is exclusive for such disputes - Held that workmen must seek remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. (Paras Not mentioned) D) Labour Law - Interpretation of Standing Orders - Exclusive Forum - Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, Section 13A; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Labour Court is the designated forum for questions arising as to application or interpretation of certified Standing Orders and its decision is final and binding - Civil court cannot entertain such questions - Held that Section 13A provides a complete mechanism for resolution of disputes relating to standing orders. (Paras Not mentioned)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a civil suit filed by workmen challenging termination orders passed after disciplinary enquiries is maintainable in a civil court when the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and certified Standing Orders under Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 provide for adjudication of such disputes; and whether certified Standing Orders have statutory force.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court held that civil court has no jurisdiction to entertain suits by workmen challenging termination orders after domestic enquiry, as the dispute is an industrial dispute and remedy lies under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Certified Standing Orders do not have statutory force. The appeals filed by the Corporation were allowed and the civil suits dismissed.
Law Points
- Civil court jurisdiction is impliedly barred when dispute is an industrial dispute under Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
- certified Standing Orders framed under Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act
- 1946 do not have statutory force or delegated/subordinate legislation character but are binding conditions of service
- remedy for workmen aggrieved by termination after domestic enquiry lies before Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal under Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947 and not in civil court
