Moji Ram v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam And Others
!"#$!%&'&"()**
) +,- * . -. -- , ****
!"
#
. ($!!/ "0$1&23 * $%&
!
#(
)
!*+
,"
#
-, , "( ../#
- , #0)
1 # ,"
# )
, # "
+
##2 #1 ! % - )
# 3% .33/. - )
# 3% .3%. 4( , $ - &,( .335
( # 4
+
( ,
(1
$.&
) ((1 ",
3% %553 +,(7*
#(() 41 .8 %55. 3% .33:#,
; 3:
.3%3 !
,((1
:3 .3%:
$:&
", ( #
"
,( 9$<& ,( %: #
$ - & ,( .335
(+4( #+ #% . -
("( #
- "(
,4
= 1 #
.33/ .8334, #% - +
= 1)((4 :.33 ((1 3% .3%. . -
+ 1 ("( :.334, - "( :/33>6,"
4
- 2 - )1
+
+( + ) !( #,( 9$<&#
4!
,( 0
+
!
%3 3.
.3.:$ 2, <&# ( +
4 # # ! % - )
# 3% .33/. - )
# 3% .3%.4, !( $<&
-, !
:% .3.:+
", ( #
-,
?, )
#
5@ #
#
4 # # - " ((4 "( ", (#
( ,;,(( "
"#
-,
,+
13. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties on this point we are of the view that in case where a person invokes the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for fixation of his pay under relevant rules/instructions or even on the basis of a judgment of a competent Court, the question of delay and laches would not come in as it would be a case of a continuing wrong and every month the person is paid the salary which according to him is not in accordance with the relevant rules and instructions a fresh cause of action would arise every month. Such a case is not a case of one time action like the case of termination or dismissal from service. As observed by the Apex Court in M. R. Gupta's case (supra) that the Court while granting relief regarding the payment of arrears may apply law of limitation. Since a Civil Suit would be maintainable for realizing arrears of three years and two months, the writ Court would be justified in restricting the payment of arrears to three years and two months prior to the filing of the writ petition.
- 3 -
14. We do not agree with the submission of the learned Advocate General, Punjab, that the writ Court should decline the relief to a person who is claiming correct fixation of his pay in accordance with the relevant rules and instructions merely because he has been negligent in approaching the Court. If such a person can file a civil suit for the correct fixation of his pay where he can further claim arrears up to a period of three years and two months prior to the Filing of the civil suit, there is no reason why such relief should be denied by a writ Court. Apart from the above, it may be noticed that in such cases as the present one where only fixation of pay is sought and arrears are claimed, rights of third party do not intervene during the period the person may not have approached the Court. The correct fixation of pay and the payment of arrears do not affect third party's right. This was also so observed by the Division Bench in Rattan Singh's case which has been quoted above, on the basis of which the argument was raised by the learned Advocate General Punjab.
15. For the foregoing reasons we are of the view that in cases where only fixation of pay according the relevant rules/instructions or a judgment is prayed for, the writ petition cannot be dismissed at the threshold on the ground of delay and laches but the payment of arrears can be restricted to a reasonable period. Three years and two months would be considered a reasonable period as that is the period for which a person can ask for the payment of arrears before a Civil Court. $A&
;,(( "
"
" +, 4( #"
"", "
#
"
0
"
# !"
:3 .3%:)+ #
!+
# !"
!
3.
.3.: "( + % . -
#
2
(1 %3 1 #
- 4 -
'
4, 2(
(1"
+
-, ,"
,+
"( # ",+", 4,
#"
* (
+(, 4 )* ,#
%31 "( - (,+4(
$/&
1 #
1
+ ) ,
#
B ( (1 -
"
, 164, + ,"
4 # )
)
) (+4( ( 4, #
,
$9&
7
4 ! "
)
.3.:
. ($!!/ "0$1&2
0$1!
1. Whether speaking/reasoned?
Yes/No
2. Whether reportable?
Yes/No