RUSHIBHAI JAGDISHCHANDRA PATHAK versus BHAVNAGAR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

Citation: [2022] 16 S.C.R. 1014 · Decided: 18-05-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: AJAY RASTOGI · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

cites 5 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1014
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 16 S.C.R.
RUSHIBHAI JAGDISHCHANDRA PATHAK
v.
BHAVNAGAR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
(Civil Appeal No. 4134 of 2022)
MAY 18, 2022
[AJAY RASTOGI AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.]
Service Matter: Pay Scale – Recovery of arrears – In terms
of the scheme, the appellant-‘Data Entry Operator’ granted higher
pay-scale of the next promotional post of Rs.5,000-8,000/- from
different dates – Pursuant to the order dated 28th October 2010,
the benefit provided under the Scheme revised by the respondent-
Corporation observing that the appellants and others employees
were erroneously granted benefit of the higher grade pay-scale of
the next promotional post instead of the next stage in the hierarchy
of pay scales – Higher pay scale of the promotional posts granted
to the appellants withdrawn and the excess payments made were
recovered from the appellants – After a gap of seven years, the
appellants filed writ petitions challenging the order dated 28th
October, 2010 and  direction was sought against the respondent-
Corporation to avail the pay-scale of the next higher promotional
post and to pay the arrears – Writ Petition allowed – Division Bench
partially allowed the appeal by the Corporation, in view of delay
and laches on the part of the appellants in approaching the court,
by restricting the grant of higher pay-scale of Rs.5,000-8,000/- with
consequential benefits from the date of the judgment of the Single
Judge; that the prayer of the appellants for recovery of arrears
from 2010 was declined, and that the respondent-Corporation,
would not be required to refund any amount that they have
recovered from the appellants pursuant to the order dated 28th
October 2010 – On appeal, held: Rules of limitation and delay and
laches are not meant to destroy the rights of the parties but serve a
larger public interest and are founded on public policy – If the
employee’s claim is found to be correct on merits, they would be
entitled to be paid according to the properly fixed pay-scale in future
and the question of limitation would arise for recovery of the arrears
   [2022] 16 S.C.R. 1014
1014
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1015
for the past period – Appellants entitled to arrears in the pre-revised
pay-scale of Rs.5,000-8,000/- for three years prior to the date of
filing of the Writ Petitions along with interest at the rate of 7% per
annum with effect from 1st September 2017 – Limitation Act, 1963
– Delay and Laches.
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The doctrine of delay and laches, or for that
matter statutes of limitation, are considered to be statutes of
repose and statutes of peace, though some contrary opinions have
been expressed. The courts have expressed the view that the
law of limitation rests on the foundations of greater public interest
for three reasons, namely, (a) that long dormant claims have more
of cruelty than justice in them; (b) that a defendant might have
lost the evidence to disapprove a stale claim; and (iii) that persons
with good causes of action (who are able to enforce them) should
pursue them with reasonable diligence. Equally, change in de facto
position or character, creation of third party rights over a period
of time, waiver, acquiesce, and need to ensure certitude in
dealings, are equitable public policy considerations why period
of limitation is prescribed by law. Law of limitation does not apply
to writ petitions, albeit the discretion vested with a constitutional
court is exercised with caution as delay and laches principle is
applied with the aim to secure the quiet of the community,
suppress fraud and perjury, quicken diligence, and prevent
oppression. [Para 9][1021-A-D]
1.2 The law recognises a ‘continuing’ cause of action which
may give rise to a ‘recurring’ cause of action as in the case of
salary or pension. So long as the employee is in service, a fresh
cause of action would arise every month when they are paid their
salary on the basis of a wrong computation made contrary to the
rules. If the employee’s claim is found to be correct on merits,
they would be entitled to be paid according to the properly fixed
pay-scale in future and the question of limitation would arise for
recovery of the arrears for the past period. [Para 10][1022-E-G]
1.3 The respondent-Corporation had accepted the
interpretation rendered by the High Court to the Scheme whereby
RUSHIBHAI JAGDISHCHANDRA PATHAK v. BHAVNAGAR
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1016
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 1

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.