Dalip Singh, J. - (1.) These revision petitions have been filed by the R.S.R.T.C. who is defendant in the suits which have been filed by the plaintiff non petitioners. In the said suits the defendant -petitioner R.S.R.T.C. filed applications under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC praying that the suits are not maintainable in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Zakir Hussain's case reported in : 2005 (7) SCC 447 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in respect of Industrial Disputes, the civil suit is not maintainable and the remedy lies by raising a dispute and getting the same adjudicated before the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, hence, the plaint deserves to be rejected.
(2.) The learned trial court in all these cases has rejected the application filed by the R.S.R.T.C. by in the impugned orders and hence, the R.S.R.T.C. has come up in revision before this court under Sec. 115 C.P.C. Since all these revision petitions have been filed by the R.S.R.T.C. and a common question arises they have been heard and decided together.
(3.) At the outset it may be stated that the learned counsel for the R.S.R.T.C. in these cases after going through their record submitted that in these suits the plaintiffs who are the non -petitioners have not challenged any order which may fall within the scope of Sec. 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. As such, there are no cases where the suits have been filed in respect of any orders either of dismissal, termination, discharge or retrenchment of the plaintiff workman. Instead in these suits the plaintiffs have sought relief in respect of grant of selection scale or withholding of increment as a measure of punishment or recovery etc. which do not fall within the purview of Sec. 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.;