Back
VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA, YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Ram Kishor Dixit – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J.-Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Ankit Gaur, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondent.
2. The present intra Court appeal is directed against the judgment and order 23.8.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ-A No. 12140 of 2024 (Ram Kishor Dixit v. State of U.P. and others), in terms of which the writ petition has been dismissed on the ground of the delay.
3. The records of the case indicate that the writ petition had been filed with the assertion that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher in the CT Grade in a recognized and aided educational institution on 1.9.1973, and was regularized by an order dated 30.6.1975. He was awarded revised pay scale vide order dated 3.6.1989 and the benefit of selection grade after 10 years' service in the LT Grade.
4. It is stated that the petitioner was subsequently promoted as Lecturer (Sociology) on a vacant post in the institution by the Committee of Management with the approval of the District Inspector of Schools by an order dated 20.11.1997. The petitioner subsequently superannuated on 30.6.2009.
5. Certain
Claims for salary arrears are subject to delay and laches, while continuing wrongs may allow for relief despite delay, provided they do not unsettle settled rights.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of delay and laches, the concept of continuing wrong, and the interpretation of the Limitation Act in employee pay-scale disputes.
The court established that inordinate delay in seeking legal remedy, especially in service-related claims, can bar relief, and that the doctrine of delay and laches is a critical consideration in the....
The court affirmed that service-related claims may be entitled to relief despite long delays under the doctrine of continuing wrongs but restricted arrears to a maximum of three years prior to filing....
Claims for service-related arrears are generally limited to three years prior to the filing date of the petition, reflecting principles of delay and laches.
Compassionate appointments are substantive and entitled to regular pay-scale from the initial appointment date, with arrears limited to three years prior to filing due to delay.
Service-related claims can be enforced even after delays, limited to three years before filing due to continuing wrongs affecting entitlements.
In employment-related claims, arrears are limited to three years before the filing of the writ petition, reflecting the principles of delay and laches.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
