TMI Blog1991 (8) TMI 328X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 - Civil Appeal Nos. 1852 & 4772 of 1989 - - - Dated:- 21-8-1991 - SHETTY, K.J. (J), RAMASWAMI, V. (J) II and YOGESHWAR DAYAL (J),JJ. JUDGMENT The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY , J. These appeals against the decision of the High Court of Punjab Haryana raise a short issue, concerning 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 High Court has observed that if the dismissal of the employee is illegal, void or inoperative being in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribed for challenging an illegal order. Since the. order of termination was bad, the suit was not barred by time. In the second appeal preferred by the State the High Court agreed with the View following its earlier decisions. CA No. 4772/89 The respondent in this appeal was a Railway 667 Police Constable. He was appointed on 14 November 1977. On 15 March 1979, he was discharged from service for some misconduct. On 15 June 1979, his appeal was rejected by AIG, Railways,-Patiala, Punjab. On 30 November 1979, his revision petition was dismissed by the Inspector General of Police, Punjab. On 12 February 1985 he brought a suit seeking declaration that the order discharging him from service and confirmed in the appeal and revision, was illegal, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tation runs afoul of our Limitation Act. The statute of limitation was intended to provide a time limit for all suits conceivable. Section 3 of the Limitation Act provides that a suit, appeal or application instituted after the prescribed period of limitation must subject to the provisions of Sections 4 to 24 be dismissed although limitation has not been set up as a defence, Section-2(J) defines the expression period of limitation to mean the period of limitation prescribed in the Schedule for suit, appeal or application. Section 2(J) also defines, prescribed period to mean the period of limitation computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The Court s function on the presentation of plaint is simply to examine whether, on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts were dismissed from service. May be illegally. The order of dismissal has clearly infringed their right to continue in the service and indeed they were precluded from attending the office from the date of their dismissal. They have not been paid their salary from that date. They came forward to the Court with a grievance that their dismissal from service was no dismissal in law. According to them the order of dismissal was illegal, inoperative and not binding on them. They wanted the Court to declare that their dismissal was void and inoperative and not binding on them and they continue to be in. service. For the purpose of these cases, we may assume that the order of dismissal was void inoperative and ultra vires, and not voidable. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly a nullity, but the Court may refuse to quash it because of the plaintiff s lack of standing, because he does not deserve a discretionary remedy, because he has waived his rights, or for some other legal reason. In any such case the void order remains effective and is, in reality, valid. It follows that an order may be void for one purpose and valid for another, and that it may be void against one person but valid against another. (Ibid p. 352) It will be clear from these principles, the party aggrieved by the invalidity of the order has to approach the Court for relief of declaration that the order against him is inoperative and not binding upon him. He must approach the Court within the prescribed period of limitation. If the stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rules subject to which only the power of punishment under section 7 could be exercised, is totally invalid. The order of dismissalhad therefore, no legal existence and it was not necessary for the respondent to have .the order set aside by a Court. The defence of limitation which was based .only on the contention that the order.had to be set aside by a court before it became invalid must therefore be rejected. These observations are of little assistance to the plaintiffs in the present case. This Court only emphasized that since the order of dismissal was invalid being contrary to para 241 of the Berar Police Regulations, it need not be set aside. But it may be noted that Syed Qamarali brought the suit within the period of limitation. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
