Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.19 seconds)

Union Of India vs Tarsem Singh on 19 September, 2019

"4. As regards the issue of delay in matters pertaining to claims of pension, it has already been opined by this Court in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh [Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, (2008) 8 SCC 648 : (2008) 2 SCC (L&S) 765] , that in cases of continuing or successive wrongs, delay and laches or limitation will not thwart the claim so long as the claim, if allowed, does not have any adverse repercussions on the settled third-party rights. This Court held : (SCC p. 651, para 7) "7. To summarise, normally, a belated service related claim will be rejected on the ground of delay and laches (where remedy is sought by filing a writ petition) or limitation (where remedy is sought by an application to the Administrative Tribunal). One of the exceptions to the said rule is cases relating to a continuing wrong. 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 reopening of the issue would affect the settled rights of third parties, then the claim will not be entertained. For example, if the issue relates to payment or refixation of pay or pension, relief may be granted in spite of delay as it does not affect the rights of third parties. But if the claim involved issues relating to seniority or promotion, etc., affecting others, delay would render the claim stale and doctrine of laches/limitation will be applied. Insofar as the consequential relief of recovery of arrears for a past period is concerned, the principles relating to recurring/successive wrongs will apply. As a consequence, the 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."
Supreme Court of India Cites 80 - Cited by 3438 - R F Nariman - Full Document

Debendra Nath Ghosh And Others vs The State Of West Bengal And Others on 2 June, 2014

Reference is made by counsel for the petitioner to decisions of Coordinate Benches of this Court in the case of The Calcutta Tram Mazdoor Sabha vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. in WP No.910 of 2006, being order dated 16th April, 2008; Suvra Kumar Dey & Ors. vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. in WP No.1844 of 2008, order dated 17th February, 2009; order dated 2nd June, 2014 in WP No.514 of 2012, Debendra Nath Ghosh & Ors. vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. and a very recent order of 20th April, 2021 passed in WPO 175 of 2021. Claims similar to the petitioner but upto the year 2008 have been allowed in these cases. The respondents did not challenge the orders. In a contempt proceeding being CPAN 177 of 2020, arising out of WPA 20866 of 2019 by an order dated 24th November, 2020, 3 the amount of interest paid till the year 2008 by the respondents to the petitioners therein was also duly recorded.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 11 - S Banerjee - Full Document

Prabir Kumar Mitra vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 20 January, 2015

This Court notices that in the said Prabir Kumar Mitra (Supra) decision the writ petitioner therein had approached this Court on two earlier occasions and yet chose not to raise any claim on the issue of interest. It is in that context that the said claim was rejected. Since the facts of the said case are substantially different from the instant case, the said decision cannot come to the aid of the respondents.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 21 - I P Mukerji - Full Document

The Calcutta Tram Mazdoor Sabha vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 20 March, 2009

Reference is made by counsel for the petitioner to decisions of Coordinate Benches of this Court in the case of The Calcutta Tram Mazdoor Sabha vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. in WP No.910 of 2006, being order dated 16th April, 2008; Suvra Kumar Dey & Ors. vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. in WP No.1844 of 2008, order dated 17th February, 2009; order dated 2nd June, 2014 in WP No.514 of 2012, Debendra Nath Ghosh & Ors. vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. and a very recent order of 20th April, 2021 passed in WPO 175 of 2021. Claims similar to the petitioner but upto the year 2008 have been allowed in these cases. The respondents did not challenge the orders. In a contempt proceeding being CPAN 177 of 2020, arising out of WPA 20866 of 2019 by an order dated 24th November, 2020, 3 the amount of interest paid till the year 2008 by the respondents to the petitioners therein was also duly recorded.
Calcutta High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 15 - D Datta - Full Document

Suvra Kumar Dey vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 9 October, 2013

Reference is made by counsel for the petitioner to decisions of Coordinate Benches of this Court in the case of The Calcutta Tram Mazdoor Sabha vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. in WP No.910 of 2006, being order dated 16th April, 2008; Suvra Kumar Dey & Ors. vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. in WP No.1844 of 2008, order dated 17th February, 2009; order dated 2nd June, 2014 in WP No.514 of 2012, Debendra Nath Ghosh & Ors. vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. and a very recent order of 20th April, 2021 passed in WPO 175 of 2021. Claims similar to the petitioner but upto the year 2008 have been allowed in these cases. The respondents did not challenge the orders. In a contempt proceeding being CPAN 177 of 2020, arising out of WPA 20866 of 2019 by an order dated 24th November, 2020, 3 the amount of interest paid till the year 2008 by the respondents to the petitioners therein was also duly recorded.
Calcutta High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 8 - A Bose - Full Document
1