The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between a continuing wrong and a recurring or successive wrong, and the application of the principle of recurring cause of action in determining the period for which arrears of wages should be ordered.

JUDGMENT

S C Gupte, J. - Rule. Rule taken up for hearing forthwith by consent of counsel.

2. This writ petition challenges a judgment and order passed by the Industrial Court at Kolhapur on a complaint of unfair labour practice filed by the Respondents under Item Nos.9 and 10 of Schedule IV of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (''MRTU and PULP Act'' or simply, ''Act''). The Petitioner, who is a registered co-operative society, involved in the business of supplying water to agriculturists in the vicinity, was a respondent to the complaint.

3. It was the case of the complainants that the Petitioner had employed them in various vacant permanent posts such as junior clerk, pump operator, watchman/peon, skilled labour, etc.; that the employments were since the year 1977; and that the Petitioner had, on or about 30 May 1990, agreed to a settlement under which the Petitioner agreed to pay to the Respondents various dues including annual increments payable since 1 April 1989. It was the Respondents'' case that the dues were actually paid only till 31 March 1999, whereafter the Petitioner deprived them of their monetary entitlements, thus, committing a breach of the settlement. The complaint was in respect of this breach. Reliefs sought by the complainants included a direction to the employer to implement the settlement and pay the dues and differences till date. In its written statement filed before the Industrial Court, the Petitioner raised various grounds of challenge reflecting on the maintainability of the complaint. It was, firstly, submitted that the complaint was barred by limitation. It was also submitted that the Petitioner was a registered co-operative society and not an industry; and that no industrial dispute could, accordingly, have been raised under the Industrial Disputes Act. The parties led their respective oral and documentary evidence. The Industrial Court, by its judgment and order dated 30 April 2016, allowed the complaint. Being aggrieved, the present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner employer.

4. The main controversy in the petition concerns the issue of limitation. It is submitted by Mr.Bapat, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, that the reference has been made to the Industrial Court at a much belated stage. Learned Counsel submits that where the issue relates to payment or fixation of salary or allowance, though denial of benefits occurs every month when such salary or allowance is not paid, the denial gives rise to a fresh cause of action every time it is made. Learned Counsel submits that though non-implementation of a settlement by refusal to pay salaries and allowances in accordance with it continues, when it comes to grant of consequential relief of recovery of arrears for the past period, principles relating to recurring/ successive wrongs would apply and accordingly, arrears would have to be restricted to the period of three months prior to the date of the application, which is the usual period of limitation for a complaint of unfair labour practice.

5. Ms.Gayatri Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Respondents, on the other hand, submits that wherever a wrongful act is of such character that the injury caused by it continues, the act constitutes a continuing wrong. Learned Counsel submits that distinction ought to be made between an injury caused by a wrongful act and what may be described as the effect of such injury. Learned Counsel submits that wherever the injury continues, as opposed to the effect of the injury, the wrong is a continuing wrong, giving rise to a fresh cause of action on each succeeding day. Learned Counsel submits that so far as contravention of the terms of an agreement, settlement or award is concerned, the obligation is continuous, that is to say, from day to day and month to month; and any unfair labour practice on the part of the employer in not honouring such agreement, settlement or award, as