Rights given in the settlement cannot be enforced by civil courts.

1. The above second appeal has been filed by the defendant in O.S.No.810 of 1979 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif of Vellore, North Arcot Ambedkar District. The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for a declaration that the memo No.SEV/Adm.2/A-4/701-1/78 dated 28. 1978 of the defendant and subsequent memo are void.

2. The case of the plaintiff as disclosed in the plaint filed before the trial court was that the plaintiff was appointed as nominal Muster Roll Worker on 12. 1947, that by virtue of his hard work, he was promoted as Helper on 8. 1955, later as Assistant Wireman during 1959 and again as Wireman during July, 1970 and once again promoted as Lineman Grade-I on 112. 1978 and that as per the memorandum of settlement dated 17. 1969 entered into between the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and its workmen and particularly, as per term No.9 it was mandatory on the part of the defendant Electricity Board, to abolish the category of the post of Assistant Wireman in operation subordinate service in distribution systems and the existing incumbents in that category shall be fitted into the Grade of Wireman at the next appropriate stage and as per term No. 15 of the said settlement, the settlement shall come into effect with effect from 4. 1969 for the purpose of promotion, seniority and future increment. The further case of the plaintiff was that the defendant Board issued proceedings Ms.No.1345 dated 8. 1969 confirming the terms of the above settlement and in spite of all these, there was delay of several years in properly implementing the terms of the settlement by making a proper fitment and placement in the seniority list of the workers for determining the future avenues of promotion. The defendant was said to have issued a memorandum No.SEV/Adm.2/A-4/Integration/R-200/77, dated 30.4.1977 and though it benefited the plaintiff monetarily to get back the increments as arrears on the integration, the plaintiff claimed that his due seniority and promotion to the post of Wireman were denied at the appropriate point of time and all these occurred on account of the irregular

.3. The defendant filed a written statement contending that the suit for the relief in question was not maintainable before the civil court and also either in law or on facts as projected for the plaintiff. The defendant contended that the plaintiff was appointed temporarily as Helper and he joined as such on 8. 1955, that he was appointed as Assistant Wireman with effect from 1. 1960 and was integrated as Wireman with effect from 4. 1969 as per B.P. Ms.No.1345, dated 8. 1969 and that the dates as furnished by the plaintiff to the contrary are not correct. It was also contended that the plaintiff was a party to the Boards proceedings and the agreement, which was binding on him and the plaintiff cannot go back against the terms of the agreement and challenge the seniority list published by the Board. The defendant also contended that the terms of the settlement were implemented and the proceedings dated 30.4.1977 in effect gives retrospective effect from 4. 1969 and the claim made by the plaintiff that his juniors have been given promotion earlier to the plaintiff was baseless and incorrect. The factual claim made by the plaintiff that persons in Serial Nos.73, 76, 101, 117 and 118 are juniors of the plaintiff, was denied and it is claimed that they were all seniors to the plaintiff. Similarly, in respect of V. Surian, who was Helper during 1968, it was pointed out that he was appointed as Wireman with effect from 23. 1968 and the allegations and claims to the contra were denied. It is also stated that pursuant to the agreement between the Union and the defendant Board, the Union agreed to give a list of persons in whose case anomalies have to be set right and such list was given only on 24. 1979 and it contained about 229 persons. The seniority list communicated on 28. 1978 was for Linemen Grade-I as on 28. 1978 and since the plaintiff