Supreme Court allows appeal on pay fixation issue, stresses ongoing claim nature. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, ruling that the appellant's grievance of incorrect pay fixation was a continuing wrong, entitling him to seek proper ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, ruling that the appellant's grievance of incorrect pay fixation was a continuing wrong, entitling him to seek proper pay throughout his tenure. The Court emphasized the ongoing nature of the claim for correct salary and remitted the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. It clarified that issues of limitation for consequential reliefs and arrears should be separately determined. No costs were awarded in this case.
Issues involved: The judgment deals with the issue of whether the Tribunal's dismissal of an application for proper pay fixation as time-barred was contrary to law.
Facts: The appellant, who joined the service of the State of Punjab in 1967 and later the railways in 1978, claimed that his pay fixation upon joining the railways was incorrect. He sought proper pay fixation from 1.8.1978 based on specific rules. The Tribunal rejected his application as time-barred, stating that the cause of action arose at the time of initial pay fixation in 1978 or upon rejection of his representation before the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
Decision: The Supreme Court held that the appellant's grievance of incorrect pay fixation constituted a continuing wrong, giving rise to a recurring cause of action each time he received a salary not computed according to rules. The Court emphasized that the right to correct salary subsists throughout the tenure of service, akin to the right of redemption in a mortgage. The Court distinguished a previous case involving termination of service, noting that the present case involved a continuous claim for correct salary payment.
Conclusion: The Court allowed the appeal, remitting the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration on the merits of the appellant's claim. The Court clarified that the issue of limitation regarding consequential reliefs and arrears, if any, should be determined separately in accordance with the law. No costs were awarded in this matter.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI OCR ✕
of 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
