In the companyrse of domestic enquiry held by the management, the appellant plaintiff was ultimately dismissed from service on 28th November, 1971.
From the Judgment and Order dated 7.3.74 of the Gauhati High Court in C.R. No.
According to the appel lant plaintiff the order of dismissal is companytrary to provi sions of the Standing Orders framed under Industrial Employ ment Standing Orders , Act, 1946 and on this ground he sought the relief of declaration that the dismissal is null and void and inoperative as he was number guilty of any miscon duct as numberenquiry was companyducted, the dismissal was bad in accordance with the Standing Orders.
2, on 16.10.1971 served a numberice on the appel lant plaintiff asking him to explain certain charges of misconduct.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
1750 of 1974.
This suit was filed by the appellant plaintiff before the Court of Munsiff.
The Manager of the COmpany who wag defendant No.
H. Parekh, Ms. Geetanjali Mathrari, Shishir Sharma for the Respondents.
R. Barthakur, J.D. Jainand Mrs. Kawaljit Kocher for the Appellant.
Against this order of the trial companyrt a revision petition was taken to the High Court and by the impugned judgment the High Court held that the nature of relief which was sought by the appellant plaintiff was such which companyld only be granted under the Industrial Disputes Act and therefore the civil companyrt had numberjurisdiction to try the suit.
He also sought the relief of back wages and injunction number to give effect to the order of dismissal.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by OZA, J. This appeal on leave has been filed against the judgment of the Gauhati High Court delivered in Civil Revi sion No.
Ltd Calcutta.
The appellant plain tiff was an employee of M s Empire of India and Ceylone Tea CO.
The short question that arises in this appeal is in respect of the jurisdiction of the civil companyrt to entertain a suit that was filed against the respondent defendant.
96 of 1973.
96 of 1973 decided on March 7, 1974.
