The main legal point established in the judgment is that if one remedy is pursued, it must be pursued to its logical end and should not be given up in the middle to start proceedings under another enactment.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

1. Identical issues are involved in all these 10 petitions and therefore, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment. The issue in this batch of cases is as to whether the employees of a school governed by the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973, after invoking the remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 on the ground that they are workmen, withdraw those cases before the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court without taking permission for filing a case before the Delhi School Tribunal functioning under the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973 , yet claim that the remedy under the Delhi School Tribunal is open to such employees. Putting it differently, whether the spirit of the provision of Order 23 Rule 1 CPC applies for barring the employees of a school in approaching the Delhi School Tribunal, although the earlier cases filed before the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court are withdrawn without liberty to file proceedings before the Delhi School Tribunal. It is not disputed that the employees of the school, and who are for the sake of convenience referred to as the respondents, did apply before the Labour Court for withdrawal of the cases with liberty to be granted for approaching the Delhi School Tribunal, however, the Labour Court only allowed the applications for withdrawal of the cases but did not give liberty/permission to file proceedings before Delhi School Tribunal.

2. So far as the issue as to whether the employees of a school can pursue the remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, this aspect is no longer res integra and is decided by a learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Apeejay School Vs. Darbari Lal & Ors. 170(2010) DLT 608. The learned Single Judge in this detailed judgment has examined various judgments of different Courts, including of the Supreme Court, and held that the jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court under the Industrial Disputes Act is not barred in relation to disputes raised by workmen employed in schools and covered by the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973. Effectively, what the learned Single Judge holds in the case of Apeejay School (supra) is that employee of a school can have two remedies with respect to removal etc; one remedy is for redressel of his grievance before the Delhi School Tribunal under the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973; and second before the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

3. On behalf of the petitioner, reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Agra District Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Prescribed Authority, Labour Court, U.P. & Ors., AIR 2001 SC 2396 to argue that the spirit of Order 23 Rule 1 CPC applies when an employee of a school withdraws his case filed before the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal without taking permission to file the case before the Delhi School Tribunal, and in which circumstance, the remedy before the Delhi School Tribunal would be barred. Para 7 of the judgment is relied upon and which reads as under:-

7. So far as the third contention is concerned regarding jurisdiction of the Labour Court, we make it clear that it was not the first round of litigation that the parties had gone before the Labour Court, and at that stage if the Labour Court had no jurisdiction, that point should have been raised at once when the matter came up before the High Court when the matter was remanded to the Labour Court to decide on merits of the case. Apart from that this Court in (1970) 1 SCR 205: (AIR 1970 SC 245: 1970 Lab IC 285) Co-operative Central Bank Ltd. v. Addl. Industrial Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh considered the identical provisions arising under the Andhra Pradeshh Co-operative Societies Act and held that Labour Court has jurisdiction in such matters. The position is that when a question of employment arises certainly it cannot be said that the doors of the Labour Court are shut. It is po