Sohan Lal vs Union of India and Another

Mahavir S. Chauhan, J.—On perusal of the file, it transpires that the appellant had approached the learned Additional Senior Sub Judge, Jind (hereinafter referred to as "the trial Court") by filing a suit for declaration to the effect that order of his eviction from railway quarter No. T-214-C JHI, passed by the Railway Authorities. In the written statement, a specific objection was raised on behalf of the respondents that the suit was not maintainable before the Civil Court and that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit. On the basis of pleadings, issues were framed, evidence was let in and arguments were heard. Learned trial Court returned findings on the issue regarding jurisdiction of the Civil Court against the plaintiff-appellant and dismissed the suit on merits also. The appellant went in appeal before the learned District Judge, Jind, (hereinafter referred to as, "the Appellate Court") to challenge the judgment and decree dated 16.11.1987 passed by the learned trial Court dismissing his suit. The appellate Court, vide judgment and decree dated 28.7.1988, set aside the findings of the learned trial Court on issue Nos. 1 and 2, i.e., on merits but upheld the findings recorded by the trial Court as regards bar of jurisdiction of the Civil Court, and returned a very definite finding that the matter was within the jurisdiction of Central Administrative Tribunal, constituted under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

As no one has put in appearance on behalf of the parties, I have gone through the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant, in the grounds of appeal and his submissions made before the learned trial Court and the learned First Appellate Court, and find that there is no dispute with regard to the fact that allotment of quarter, in question, was cancelled by the Railway Authorities. This makes necessary a reference to Section 3(q) of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, which reads as under:-

3(q) "Service matters", in relation to a person, means all matters relating to the conditions of his service in connection with the affairs of the Union or of any State or of any local or other authority within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India, or as the case may be, of any corporation owned or controlled by the Government, as respects-

(i) remuneration (including allowances), pension and other retirement benefits;

(ii) tenure including confirmation, seniority, promotion, reversion, premature retirement and superannuation;

(iii) Leave of any kind;

(iv) disciplinary matters; or

(v) any other matter whatsoever.

As observed by the learned lower appellate Court, cancellation of allotment of quarter is covered by clause (v) of the aforesaid section of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (which came into force in July, 1985) and, as such, only the Central Administrative Tribunal has got the jurisdiction in the matter. However, the trial Court and the learned Appellate Court have omitted to take note of the provisions of Order VII, Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which reads as under:-

ORDER- VII -PLAINT

xx xx xx

Return of plaint.-(1) Subject to the provisions of rule 10A, the plaint shall at any stage of the suit be returned to be presented to the Court in which the suit should have been instituted.

(Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that a Court of appeal or revision may direct, after setting aside the decree passed in a suit, the return of the plaint under this sub-rule.

(2) Procedure on returning plaint.-On returning a plaint, the Judge shall endorse thereon the date of its presentation and return, the name of the party presenting it, and a brief statement of the reasons for returning it.

In view of the provisions of Order VII, Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the plaint deserves to be returned to the plaintiff-appellant for being presented before the appropriate forum, i.e., Central Administrative Tribunal. It may be added that return of the plaint can be ordered at the appellate stage including the stage of Regular Second Appeal. Under the circumstances, the judgment and decree of both the courts below are set aside and the matter is ordered to be remitted back to the trial Court with a direction to comply with provisions of Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC and if needed to comply Rule 10A of Order VII of the CPC also, but with no order as to costs.