1991 (8) TMI 328 - SC - Indian Laws

If the dismissal of the employee is illegal, void or inoperative being in contravention of the mandatory provisions of any rules or conditions of service, there is no limitation to bring a suit for declaration that the employee continues to be in service? Held that - A suit for declaration by a dismissed employee on the ground that his dismissal is void, is governed by Article 120 of the Limitation Act. A suit for declaration that an order of dismissal or termination from service passed against the plaintiff is wrongful, illegal or ultra vires is governed by Article 113 of the Limitation Act. Appeal allowed. Set aside the judgment and decree of the High Court and dismiss the suit in each case

Summary

Issues:
1. Suit for declaration by dismissed employee regarding service continuation.
2. Limitation governing the suit for declaration.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Suit for declaration by dismissed employee regarding service continuation.

The Supreme Court heard appeals against the decision of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana concerning the limitation governing the suit for declaration by a dismissed employee that he continues to be in service since his dismissal was void and inoperative. The Court summarized the facts of two cases where employees were dismissed and sought declaration that their dismissals were void and they continued to be in service. The High Court had repeatedly held that if the dismissal is illegal, unconstitutional, or against natural justice, the employee can approach the Court at any time seeking such a declaration. However, the Supreme Court analyzed the legal principles regarding the validity of dismissal orders and the need for a declaration from a competent body or Court to establish the invalidity of an order. The Court emphasized the importance of approaching the Court within the prescribed period of limitation to seek relief.

Issue 2: Limitation governing the suit for declaration.

The Court delved into the provisions of the Limitation Act to determine the applicability of limitation to suits for declaration by dismissed employees. It discussed the purpose of limitation laws to provide a time limit for all conceivable suits and highlighted the significance of the right to sue accruing when the cause of action arises. The Court cited legal principles and previous judgments to establish that a suit for declaration that an order of dismissal is wrongful, illegal, or ultra vires is governed by Article 113 of the Limitation Act. The Court disagreed with the view taken by the Punjab & Haryana High Court that such suits are not governed by any limitation provisions. The Supreme Court overruled the previous decisions of the High Court and held that suits seeking declaration regarding wrongful dismissals are subject to limitation under Article 113. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeals, set aside the judgments of the High Court, and dismissed the suits in each case without awarding costs.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court clarified the legal principles governing suits for declaration by dismissed employees and established that such suits are subject to the limitation period under Article 113 of the Limitation Act. The Court emphasized the importance of approaching the Court within the prescribed period of limitation to seek relief regarding wrongful dismissals.