Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2008 (8) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (8) TMI 986 - SC - Indian LawsEntitlement for disability pension - Respondent while working in the Indian Army was invalidated out of Army service, in medical category - Disability pension ought to be paid from the date it fell due on 13.11.1983 - delay of 16 years for consequential claim for arrears - relevant date form which the pension to be granted. HELD THAT:- The principles underlying continuing wrongs and recurring/ successive wrongs have been applied to service law disputes. A `continuing wrong' refers to a single wrongful act which causes a continuing injury. `Recurring/successive wrongs' are those which occur periodically, each wrong giving rise to a distinct and separate cause of action. This Court in Balakrishna S.P. Waghmare v. Shree Dhyaneshwar Maharaj Sansthan [1959 (3) TMI 53 - SUPREME COURT], explained the concept of continuing wrong in the context of Section 23 of Limitation Act, 1908 corresponding to section 22 of Limitation Act, 1963. Where a service related claim is based on a continuing wrong, relief can be granted even if there is a long delay in seeking remedy, with reference to the date on which the continuing wrong commenced, if such continuing wrong creates a continuing source of injury. But there is an exception to the exception. If the grievance is in respect of any order or administrative decision which related to or affected several others also, and if the re-opening of the issue would affect the settled rights of third parties, then the claim will not be entertained. In so far as the consequential relief of recovery of arrears for a past period, the principles relating to recurring/successive wrongs will apply. As a consequence, High Courts will restrict the consequential relief relating to arrears normally to a period of three years prior to the date of filing of the writ petition. In this case, the delay of 16 years would affect the consequential claim for arrears. The High Court was not justified in directing payment of arrears relating to 16 years, and that too with interest. It ought to have restricted the relief relating to arrears to only three years before the date of writ petition, or from the date of demand to date of writ petition, whichever was lesser. It ought not to have granted interest on arrears in such circumstances. Hence, these appeals are allowed. The order of the Division Bench directing payment of disability pension from the date it fell due, is set aside. As a consequence, the order of the learned Single Judge is restored.
|