H.H. THE MAHARANA SAHIB SHRI BHAGWAT SINGH BAHADUR OF UDAIPUR versus THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS

Citation: [1964] 5 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 03-10-1963 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

t 
i 
.I 
I 
• 
THE SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
H.H. THE MAHARANA SAHIB SHRI BHAGWAT 
SINGH BAHADUR OF UDAIPUR 
v. 
THE. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS 
(P.B. 
GAJENDRAGADKAR, K. 
SUBBA 
RAO, K.N. 
\VANCHOO, J.C. SHAH AND RAGHlJBAR DAYAL JJ.) 
Industrial Dispute.• Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), s. ID-Reference 
by State Gorernment-Liability of .Maharajah to pay staff on re-
trenchment-Reference whether competent without sanction of 
the Union Gorernment under s. 87 B of the Code of Civil Procedure. 
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act 5 of 1908). ss. 86, 87B-
Protection of ruler from being sued-Whether applies to proceed-
ings for adjudication of Industrial Dispute. 
. . 
. · · 
Constitution of India, Art. 362-Rights, privileges iindlmmuni-
ries of Rulers, nature of. 
· 
A dispute arose between. the appellant and his employees in 
the "Motor Garage department" in respect of the claim made by 
the employees for retrenchment and other compensation and leave 
facilities. The Government of the State of Rajasthan, ·on December . 
18, 1957, referred under s. 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, 
the above-mentioned dispute to the Industrial Tribunal, Rajasthan. 
Two preliminary objections were raised before the Industrial 
Tribunal by the appellant against the maintainability of the 
reference: 
(I) That without the sanction of the Union Government under. 
s. 87B of the Code of Civil Procedure, the reference to the Industrial 
Tribunal was incompetent. 
(2) That on the date when the reference was made no Industrial 
Tribunal was constituted under s. 7A of the Industrial Disputes· 
Act, 1947 as amended by Act 36 of 1956, and on reconstitution 
of the Tribunal, the reference became incompetent. 
The Tribunal rejected both the objections. The High Court 
also dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging 
the validity of the order of the Tribunal. Hence this appeal. 
Ileld,' (i) Section 86 read with s. 87 of the Code of Civil 
Procedure in terms protects a Ruler from being "sued" and not 
against the institution of any other proceeding which is not in the 
nature of a suit. A proceeding which does not commence with 
a plaint or petition in the nature of a plaint, or where the claim 
is not in respect of a dispute ordinarily triable in a civil court, . 
would prima facie not be regarded as falling within s. 86 Code of 
Civil Procedure. Section 86 of the Code excludes the jurisdiction 
of the civil courts and must be strictly construed. It docs not 
debar the commencement of proceedings for adjudication of an 
' 
I/SCI New Delhi/64-1 
1963 
October J. 
1963 
Ii.Ji. the 
Maharana Sahib 
Shri Bhagwat 
Singh Bahadur 
of Udaijmr 
v. 
The State of 
Rajas than 
Shah J. 
2 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1964] 
industrial dispute for two reasons: neither party to the proceeding 
is sded by the initiation of the p1'oceeding and the Tribunal is not 
a court. 
(ii) Article 362 of the Constitution declares that in the exercise 
of legislative and executive power by the Union and the State due 
regard shall be had to the guarantee or dssurance given under any 
covenant or agreement with respect to the personal rights, privileges 
and dignities of the Ruler of an Indian State. These rights, pri-
vileges and dignities which are, for historical reasons, recommended 
to be respected, avail the Rulers of Indian States in their status 
as Indian citizens and not in recognition of any sovereign authority 
continuing to remain vested in them. 
In the present case, the 
appellant has also, since the Constitution, been a citizen of India, 
and his recognition as Ruler under Art. 366(22.l of the Consti-
tution has not altered that status, but as a citizen he is assured a 
privileged position. 
(iii) By sub-s. 
(2) 
of the Rajasthan Industrial Tribunal 
(Constitution and Proceedings) Validating Act, 1959, the Tribunal 
originally constituted under s. 7 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 
1947, before the Act was amended by Act 36 of 1956, is to be deemed 
to have been duly constituted under s. 7 A, and the reference made 
on December 18, 1957 is to be deemed to have been made as if 
the Tribunal were constituted under s. 7 A of the amended Act. 
The Validating Act is, because of Item 22 List Ill of the Seventh 
Schedule lo the Constitution, within the competence of the State 
Legislature. 
As the Act was reserved for the consideration of 
the President and has received his assent, by virtue of Art. 254(2) 
it must prevail in the State of Rajasthan. 
Mund

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.