Civil court jurisdiction barred in industrial dispute over termination, reinstatement and back wages under the Industrial Disputes Act.

A suit by workmen seeking declaration that termination was illegal, along with reinstatement and back wages, falls outside civil court cognizance where the dispute arises from service conditions governed by Certified Standing Orders and is essentially an industrial dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The special statutory machinery under that Act is the proper forum for claims based on breach of seniority principles, discriminatory retrenchment, or the last come first go rule. Subject-matter jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent, waiver, or failure to raise an objection earlier. The civil court decrees were therefore without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the civil court had jurisdiction to entertain a suit by workmen seeking declaration that their termination was illegal and seeking reinstatement with back wages, when the dispute arose out of service conditions governed by Certified Standing Orders and was essentially covered by the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Analysis: The dispute concerned termination of work-charged employees after completion of the project and challenged the employer's action on the basis of alleged breach of seniority principles and discriminatory retrenchment. The governing principles on exclusion of civil court jurisdiction were applied: where the dispute is an industrial dispute, or where the right asserted and the remedy sought are created or regulated by the Industrial Disputes Act, the proper forum is the machinery under that Act and not the civil court. The claims for reinstatement and back wages, coupled with allegations of breach of Certified Standing Orders and of the principle of last come first go, brought the matter within the special regime of industrial adjudication. As the objection concerned subject-matter jurisdiction, consent, waiver, or failure to raise the plea at an earlier stage could not confer jurisdiction on a civil court that lacked it.

Conclusion: The civil court had no jurisdiction to decide the suit, and the decrees of the courts below were without jurisdiction.

Final Conclusion: The suit lay exclusively within the industrial adjudication framework, and the civil court decrees were liable to be set aside for want of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: A suit for reinstatement and consequential relief by workmen, founded on breach of service conditions governed by Certified Standing Orders and raising an industrial dispute, is barred from civil court cognizance where the Industrial Disputes Act provides the exclusive remedial forum; lack of subject-matter jurisdiction renders the decree a nullity.

---