K. N. Seth, J. - (1.) In this appeal by the plaintiff the only question that arises for consideration is whether the suit was barred under Sec. 22 of the Payment of Wages Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The reliefs claimed in the suit were (1) for a declaration that the order of removal of the plaintiff from service was invalid, (2) that a decree for Rs. 5,587.97 be passed as arrears of wages, and (3) that a mandatory injunction be issued directing the defendant to reinstate the plaintiff in service.
(2.) The trial Court decreed the suit holding that the order dated 13th December, 1967 terminating the plaintiffs service was illegal and ultra vires. A mandatory injunction was also issued commanding the defendant to reinstate the plaintiff in service. The trial court also granted a decree for recovery of the amount claimed as arrears of wages for the period December, 16, 1957 and February 14, 1961. On appeal the learned Additional District Judge held that the suit was not cognizable by the Civil Court and directed that the plaint be returned for presentation to the proper authority.
(3.) The impugned order of the learned Additional District Judge dated 17-3-1969 is not appealable as a decree. The suit of the plaintiff has not been dismissed. The impugned order is in the nature of an order under Rule 10, Order VII, C. P. C. However, that order would be appealable as an order under Order XLIII, Rule 1(a), C. P. C. and I entertain the present appeal as an appeal from Order.;