[ad_1]
Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
R.S.R.T.C. Through Managing Director vs Satya Veer Singh S/O Shri Ramu Ram on 15 July, 2025
Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
[2025:RJ-JP:26123]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 222/2023
1. R.s.r.t.c. Through Managing Director, Parivahan Marg,
Jaipur.
2. Chief Manager, R.S.R.T.C, Parivahan Marg, Jaipur Depot
Jaipur
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Satya Veer Singh S/o Shri Ramu Ram, Aged About 39
Years, R/o Village And Post Titanwad, District- Jhunjhunu,
Working As Driver Jaipur Depot, RSRTC, Jaipur.
2. The Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), No. 2 Jaipur
City, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J. K. Singhi, Senior Counsel with
Mr. Tarun Verma, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ankul Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Ghiya, Adv.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
DATE OF JUDGMENT 15/07/2025
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioners-
defendants (for short ‘the defendants’) against the order dated
25.04.2006 passed by Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) and Judicial
Magistrate No.2, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Civil Suit No.497/2005,
whereby the application filed by the defendants under Order 7
Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC has been dismissed.
Learned Senior Counsel for the defendants submits that the
respondent No-1-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit for
declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants with
(Downloaded on 21/07/2025 at 09:56:09 PM)
[2025:RJ-JP:26123] (2 of 3) [CR-222/2023]
the prayer that the defendants be restrained to recover money
pursuant to the orders dated 15.02.2005 and 22.02.2005.
Learned Senior Counsel for the defendants also submits that
since the plaintiff was workman in the RSRTC, the defendants filed
an application before the trial court under Order 7 Rule 11 read
with Section 151 CPC to the fact that civil court had no jurisdiction
to try the matter and only Industrial Tribunal had jurisdiction to
try it. So, suit filed by the plaintiff be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction, but the trial court has wrongly dismissed the
application.
Learned Senior Counsel for the defendants has placed
reliance upon the judgment passed by this Court in the case of
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation & Anr. Vs.
Bhanwar Lal Sharma in Civil Second Appeal No.88/2003
decided on 21.12.2023.
Learned counsel for the plaintiff has opposed the arguments
advanced by learned Senior Counsel for the defendants and
submits that by way of these orders, defendants wanted to
recover the money. During enquiry, principle of natural justice was
not followed. Plaintiff was not given proper opportunity to defend
his case. So, civil court had jurisdiction to try the matter. So, trial
court rightly dismissed the application filed by the defendants. So,
present petition filed by the defendants be dismissed.
Learned counsel for the plaintiff has placed reliance upon the
judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajasthan State
Road Transport Corporation Vs. Bal Mukund Bairwa reported
in 2009 (4) SCC 299.
(Downloaded on 21/07/2025 at 09:56:09 PM)
[2025:RJ-JP:26123] (3 of 3) [CR-222/2023]
I have considered the arguments advanced by learned Senior
Counsel for the defendants as well as learned counsel for the
plaintiff.
It is an admitted position that the suit was filed by the
plaintiff to declare the punishment orders dated 15.02.2005 and
22.02.2005 as null and void because no proper opportunity of the
hearing was given as well as principle of natural justice was not
followed. So, in my considered opinion, the trial court had not
committed any error in dismissing the application filed by the
defendants. So, present petition filed by the defendants being
devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed
accordingly.
Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Jatin /82
(Downloaded on 21/07/2025 at 09:56:09 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[ad_2]
Source link