[2025:RJ-JP:26123] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 222/2023 1. R.s.r.t.c. Through Managing Director, Parivahan Marg, Jaipur. 2. Chief Manager, R.S.R.T.C, Parivahan Marg, Jaipur Depot Jaipur ----Petitioners Versus 1. Satya Veer Singh S/o Shri Ramu Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Village And Post Titanwad, District- Jhunjhunu, Working As Driver Jaipur Depot, RSRTC, Jaipur. 2. The Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), No. 2 Jaipur City, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J. K. Singhi, Senior Counsel with Mr. Tarun Verma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ankul Gupta, Adv. Mr. Rahul Ghiya, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Judgment DATE OF JUDGMENT 15 /07/2025 This Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioners- defendants (for short ‘the defendants’) against the order dated 25.04.2006 passed by Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) and Judicial Magistrate No.2, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Civil Suit No.497/2005, whereby the application filed by the defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC has been dismissed. Learned Senior Counsel for the defendants submits that the respondent No-1-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants with [2025:RJ-JP:26123] (2 of 3) [CR-222/2023] the prayer that the defendants be restrained to recover money pursuant to the orders dated 15.02.2005 and 22.02.2005. Learned Senior Counsel for the defendants also submits that since the plaintiff was workman in the RSRTC, the defendants filed an application before the trial court under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC to the fact that civil court had no jurisdiction to try the matter and only Industrial Tribunal had jurisdiction to try it. So, suit filed by the plaintiff be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, but the trial court has wrongly dismissed the application. Learned Senior Counsel for the defendants has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation & Anr. Vs. Bhanwar Lal Sharma in Civil Second Appeal No.88/2003 decided on 21.12.2023. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has opposed the arguments advanced by learned Senior Counsel for the defendants and submits that by way of these orders, defendants wanted to recover the money. During enquiry, principle of natural justice was not followed. Plaintiff was not given proper opportunity to defend his case. So, civil court had jurisdiction to try the matter. So, trial court rightly dismissed the application filed by the defendants. So, present petition filed by the defendants be dismissed. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Bal Mukund Bairwa reported in 2009 (4) SCC 299. [2025:RJ-JP:26123] (3 of 3) [CR-222/2023] I have considered the arguments advanced by learned Senior Counsel for the defendants as well as learned counsel for the plaintiff. It is an admitted position that the suit was filed by the plaintiff to declare the punishment orders dated 15.02.2005 and 22.02.2005 as null and void because no proper opportunity of the hearing was given as well as principle of natural justice was not followed. So, in my considered opinion, the trial court had not committed any error in dismissing the application filed by the defendants. So, present petition filed by the defendants being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Jatin /82