A suit for mandatory injunction for claiming monetary relief is not maintainable and is barred by limitation if filed more than three years after the cause of action accrued.

G.C.Garg, J.

1. Plaintiff-respondent Dr. Prem Singh Mann filed a suit for mandatory injunction seeking a direction to the State of Haryana to make payment to him of his advance increments, the provident fund contribution and the bonus along with interest till the amount is paid.

2. Plaintiff joined as Medical Officer on 1.1.1975 and he worked till 16.12.1980 when he resigned. During the period of his service, he acquired the qualification of Post-graduation diploma in Child Health and also did his M.D. in Pediatrics. Case of the plaintiff is that on account of his having acquired a post-graduation diploma in Child Health and M.D. he was entitled to increments as notified by the State Government which the Slate Government failed to grant him even till his resigning the job. According to the plaintiff, he was also entitled to provident fund contribution along with interest, which he had contributed during the period of his service and also to bonus with interest. The suit was filed on 29.8.1988.

3. The suit was resisted by pleading that benefit of two advance increments w.e.f. 24.5.1979 for plaintiffs having acquired M.D. qualification was sanctioned in his favour vide government letter dated 17.3.1989 and that the payment of provident fund had been made to him on 27.3.1987 and the payment of advance increments would be made to the plaintiff in due course. It was further the case of the State that the amount of provident fund was Rs. 6203/- which had been paid and the amount of increments in respect of having acquired M.D. qualification from 24.5.1979 till resignation comes to Rs. 1741.50 which would be paid. The defendant also raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the claim made in the suit was barred by time and the suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties.

4. Trial court decreed the suit after holding that there was nothing on record to suggest that the suit was barred by time, and that the plaintiff was entitled to advance increments and the amount of provident fund and bonus with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

5. Appeal filed by the State of Haryana was partly allowed and the suit of the plaintiff was decreed for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to pay arrears of two increments w.e.f. May 1979 along with interest at the rate of Rs. 12% per annum upto the date of payment. The defendant was also directed to make payment of arrears of provident fund along with interest @ 12 % starting after the expiry of six months from the date of his resigning the job till payment. The defendant was, however, held entitled to deduct the amount already paid to the plaintiff in this behalf. It is against this decree of the courts below that the defendant has filed this appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the plaintiff resigned his job w.e.f. 16.12.1980 and the suit claiming certain benefits that accrued to him during the period of his service was filed on 29.8.1988 i.e. after a lapse of about eight years and therefore, the claim made in the suit was clearly barred by time and the courts below erred in coming to the conclusion that there was nothing on the record to show that the suit was barred by time. According to learned counsel for the appellant, right to claim arrears of increments, if any and the provident fund and bonus, accrued to the plaintiff on the date he resigned his job and he could file the suit within a period of three years from that date in view of the provisions of Article 113 of the Limitation Act as held by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab and others v. Gurdev Singh and Ashok Kumar, A.I.R. 1992 S.C. 111.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that suit for mandatory injunction was not maintainable and the plaintiff ought to have filed a suit for recovery of a specific amount, on account of arrears of increments, provident fund and bonus along with interest, if any, due as on the date of filing of the suit.

8. Learned counsel for the pl