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.

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 representations by the petitioner raising claims for arrears of salary from CT Grade to LT Grade and promotional pay scale were said to have been submitted.

6. The petitioner thereafter preferred a writ petition being Writ-A No. 12140 of 2024 seeking a direction to the Director, Secondary Education, U.P., Allahabad to take appropriate action for payment of arrears due to him from CT Grade to LT Grade and promotional pay scale together with interest, and to decide the representations stated to be pending in this regard.

7. The writ petition was opposed by the counsel appearing for the State-respondents on the ground of the same was barred by delay and laches.

8. The writ Court, upon examining the facts of the case, particularly that the petitioner had superannuated in the year 2009, held that his claim for payment of arrears from CT Grade to LT Grade and also promotional pay scale, could not be entertained, particularly as he had been given the LT Grade in the year 1989, and the promotional pay scale in the year 1996.

9. The learned Single Judge upon taking note of the fact that the petitioner had not raised the issue for the last 35 years, and the writ petition having been filed without explaining laches, proceeded to dismiss the writ petition on the ground of delay.

10. Counsel appearing for the appellant has pressed the appeal by arguing that the relief sought being with regard to arrears of salary, pertains to a recurring cause of action arising from month to month, and therefore the same could have been rejected on the ground of delay. It has been further urged that reliance placed by the learned Single Judge on the decision in the case of Union of India and others v. Tarsem Singh, (2008) 8 SCC 648, is misplaced, and the said judgment would not be applicable in the facts of the case.

11. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents has supported the reasoning given by the learned Single Judge, and has contended that the claim which had been sought to be raised by the appellant-petitioner was highly time barred and that the same has rightly been rejected.

12. Counsel appearing for the appellant, despite specific queries made by the Court, could not point out from the records the basis on which the claim was being made for arrears from CT Grade to LT Grade and the promotional pay scale. The averments in the writ petition and the documents which have been annexed alongwith the same also are not very clear in this regard.

13. There is no specific mention in the pleadings of the writ petition regarding the date on which the benefit of LT Grade was granted to the petitioner and also the period for which the arrears in this regard has been sought to be claimed. The only mention in this regard is in a representation dated 25.5.2023 said to have b