KESHOTE, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition under Section 115 of the CPC is directed against the order dated 9. 1. 1999 of the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Kama, District Bharatpur in Civil Suit No. 77/1994. Under this order the application filed by the defendant petitioners under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC, was dismissed.
(2.) THE facts of the case are that the plaintiff respondent filed civil suit against the defendant petitioners being Civil Suit No. 77/1994 for permanent injunction in the trial court. THE plaintiff respondent prayed therein for grant of following reliefs. " YAHA KI PRATIVAADIGAN KO JARIYA DIKRI HUKUM IMTANAI DIWANI PABAND KIYA JAVE KI PRATIVADIGAN VADIGAN KO AACHARYA PAD SE SEVAMUKT NA KAREN VA VADIGAN KI SEWAON KO NIYAMIT KAREN EVAM ESA KOI KARYA NA KAREN JIS SE VAADIGAN KE ADHIKARON PAR KISI PRAKAAR KA KUTHARAAGHAAT HON. " The suit was contended by the defendant petitioners. It was specially pleaded that the suit is barred under the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Act, 1989 (for short, `the Act, 1989') and the application was submitted under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC on 21st of April, 1997 but that has been dismissed under the impugned order and thus this revision petition. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order of the learned trial court. Section 27 of the Act, 1989 prohibits the Civil Court from entertaining the suit which falls thereunder. It bars the jurisdiction of the civil court. It provides that no civil court shall have jurisdiction to settle, decide or deal with any question which is, by or under this Act, is required to be settled, decided or dealt with by the Tribunal. Section 19 of the Act, 1989 provides that the employee aggrieved from the order of the Managing Committee, made under Section 18 of the Act, 1989, can prefer an appeal to the said Tribunal within 90 days from the date of receipt thereof.
(3.) SECTION 18 of the Act, 1989 provides that no employee to a recognized institution shall be removed, dismissed or reduced in rank unless he has been given by the management a reasonable opportunity of being heard against the action proposed to be taken. Section 21 of the Act, 1989 lays down that where there is any dispute between the management of a recognized institution and any of its employees with respect to the conditions of service, the management or the employee may make an application in the prescribed manner to the learned Tribunal and the decision of the learned Tribunal thereon shall be final. Section 23 of the Act, 1989 provides that the Tribunal shall entertain, hear and decide the appeal preferred under Section 19 of the Act, 1989 and disputes referred under Section 21 of the Act, 1989. ;