ORDER

1. In all these cases one of the questions for consideration is whether a civil court would have jurisdiction or whether the termination of service of a probationer was required to be challenged by raising a dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act.

2. This question is now squarely covered by the decisions of this Court in Rajasthan SRTC v. Krishna Kantl as well as in Rajasthan SRTC v. Zakir Hussain2. It has been held that the civil court would have no jurisdiction. As a these judgments are binding on us, we also hold that in all these matters the civil court had no jurisdiction to adjudicate.

3. It is however submitted, based on the following observations in the first Rajasthan SRTC easel, that: (SCC p. 95, para 36)

"36. Applying the above principles, we must hold that the suits filed by the respondents in these appeals were not maintainable in law. Even b so, the question is whether we should set aside the decrees passed in their favour by the civil courts. So far as Civil Appeal No. 3100 of 1991 is concerned, this Court had, while granting leave [in SLP (C) No. 194 of 1991] ordered on 29 - 1 - 1991 that insofar as respondent is concerned, he (appellants counsel) states th