R.S. Kejriwal, J. - (1.) The Additional Munsif & Judicial magistrate No. 5, Jaipur City, Jaipur, vide his judgment and decree dated 29.1.1991, decreed the' suit of the plaintiff-appellant and set-aside the order dated 1.2.1985, passed by the respondent No. 2, terminating his services. Against the said judgment and decree, the defendants filed an appeal, which was allowed by the Additional District Judge No. 5, jaipur City, Jaipur, vide her judgement and decree dated 25.7.1996, only on the ground that the suit filed by the plaintiff-appellant was barred by limitation. This decree has been challenged in this appeal.
(2.) Mr. Gupta, counsel for the plaintiff-appellant submits that the Lower Appellate Court committed serious illegality in placing reliance on the judgment of Apex Court reported in S.S. Rathore vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (1), and dismissing the suit on the ground that the same was barred by limitation. He submits that the aforesaid judgement of the Apex Court is based on the facts of that case and particularly Sec. 20 of the Administrative Tribunals Act (for short the 'Act'), whereas there is no similar provision under the standing orders of the R.S.R.T.C. He submits that the defendants admitted in Para No. 4 of the written statement that against the termination order the plaintiff filed an appeal which was decided. He further submits that the defendants did not raise any ojection in the written statement that the suit was barred by limitation. No issue has been framed on this point. Under such circumstances, he submits that the Lower Appellate lourt should not have allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit only on the ground that he same was barred by limitation. I agree with the arguments raised by counsel for the appellant. The learned Judge without taking into consideration the written-statement and the issues framed in the suit, allowed the appeal only on the ground that the suit was barred by limitation. The judgment on which reliance has been plced by defendants is not applicable to the facts of the present case. It suffers from error of law.
(3.) Consequently, I allow the appeal, set-aside the judgment & decree passed by the Lower Appellate Court and remand the case to the Lower Appellate Court with a Hirection to decide the appeal on merits. Both the parties are directed to appear before the said Court on 17.3.1997.;