Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.21 seconds)
Ashim Kumar Ghosh vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 28 September, 2021 cites

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 4 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

Prabir Kumar Mitra & Anr vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 9 December, 2014

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 (Appellete Side) Cites 0 - Cited by 370 - D Datta - Full Document
1