Whether civil court has jurisdiction to entertain service matters?

 Learned counsel for the rival  parties  were  heard  at
length.  It is crystal clear  and an admitted  fact that the Suit  was
filed for enforcing the alleged right to get employed/appointed
in the Government service.  The law has provided forum in respect
of   service matters   and the   jurisdiction of the Civil Court is
explicitly as well as impliedly  barred.    The Courts below have,
therefore, clearly acted without jurisdiction.     
3. Mr.Tathod,   learned   counsel   for   the   respondent
submitted that the   issue of jurisdiction of the Civil Court was

never raised in the Court below.   That may be so;  but then   the
issue  about jurisdiction of the Civil Court in service matters is the
trite law and  the higher Court cannot ignore the clear prohibitions
for the Civil Court in entertaining and deciding the Suits in service
matters. That being so, I think the following order would subserve
the interest of  justice:­
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.

SECOND APPEAL NO.  196/  2013 
State of Maharashtra
Through : the President/Collector
Zilla Niwad Samiti, Akola.
V
Kavita   D/o  Shriram Nemade

CORAM:       A.B.CHAUDHARI,  J.
DATED:    19th June,  2014.



1. Admit.  Second Appeal is  taken up for final disposal
with the consent of the rival parties. The following substantial

question of law  arise for my consideration:
Whether the Suit  filed by the  
respondent/plaintiff  in the service 
matter, namely, for  employment   
in the Government service  
for the post of  Talathi, was  
maintainable  before the 
Civil Court?   ..No
What order?  ..The Suit is allowed 
to be withdrawn with 
liberty to file  such 
proceedings  as  are 
available in law.
2. Learned counsel for the rival  parties  were  heard  at
length.  It is crystal clear  and an admitted  fact that the Suit  was
filed for enforcing the alleged right to get employed/appointed
in the Government service.  The law has provided forum in respect
of   service matters   and the   jurisdiction of the Civil Court is
explicitly as well as impliedly  barred.    The Courts below have,
therefore, clearly acted without jurisdiction.     
3. Mr.Tathod,   learned   counsel   for   the   respondent
submitted that the   issue of jurisdiction of the Civil Court was

never raised in the Court below.   That may be so;  but then   the
issue  about jurisdiction of the Civil Court in service matters is the
trite law and  the higher Court cannot ignore the clear prohibitions
for the Civil Court in entertaining and deciding the Suits in service
matters. That being so, I think the following order would subserve
the interest of  justice:­
ORDER
(1) Second Appeal No.196/2013 is allowed. 
(2) The impugned judgment and  decree passed by the learned
Civil Judge, Sr.Dn. Akola in Regular Civil Suit No.256/2010 as
well   as the judgment and order dated   31.05.2012   in Regular
Civil Appeal No.60/ 2011   both  are  set  aside.
(3) RCS No.256/2010   filed by the  respondent,  on the  motion
moved by the learned counsel for the  respondent is allowed to be
withdrawn, with liberty to file such proceedings in the appropriate
forum, as  are available in law in relation to the subject­matter of
the Suit.
(4) No order as to costs.
 JUDGE

Print Page