1. ' This appeal has been filed against an order dated 21-2-2000, whereby a learned single Judge of this Court ordered abatement of suit against defendants Nos.1 and 2, who are respondents Nos.1 and 2 in the appeal. It has been pointed out that there is a mistake in the order and actually suit was to abate against defendants Nos.1, 2 and 3, who are respondents Nos.1, 2 and 3 in the appeal.
2. ' The grievance of the appellant is that by the aforesaid order he has been deprived from seeking relief of compensation and damages for wrongful dismissal against respondents Nos.1, 2 and 3. The appellant is not clear as to whether he is a civil servant or an employee of a private organization. In case by virtue of the provisions of section 2-A of the Service Tribunal Act, he is a civil servant, then he would be competent to seek relief from the Service Tribunal, where his service appeal is pending disposal. In this situation the relief, which he can seek, is reinstatement in service, if established that he was wrongfully terminated, but he cannot ask damages or compensation. In case he is not covered by section 2-A, inasmuch as the contention on behalf of respondents Nos.1, 2 and 3 is that he, at the relevant time of dismissal/termination, was transferred to respondent No,4, which is a private corporation, then his suit, pending in this Court for recovery of dues, compensation and damages, would be competent and he would be entitled to claim the relief against respondent No,4, where he was performing duties at the time of dismissal/termination. In such a situation he would have no right to claim any relief against the official respondents, as then: would be no nexus between him and the aforesaid three official respondents. #TS##In the circumstances, we are unable to agree with the appellant that the learned Single Judge by ordering abatement of the suit against defendants. A Nos.1, 2 and 3 respondents Nos.1, 2 and 3 had committed any illegality, which has resulted in his depriviation from seeking the rightful and legal relief available and the same is without any substance. By the aforesaid order his suit has not been adversely affected and he, in case it is established that he is not a civil servant, would be entitled to claim the relief from the private defendants/respondents.
3. ' This appeal is without any substance and is dismissed in limine alongwith the listed application.