2008 (8) TMI 986 - SC - Indian Laws

Entitlement for disability pension - Respondent while working in the Indian Army was invalidated out of Army service in medical category - Disability pension ought to be paid from the date it fell due on 13.11.1983 - delay of 16 years for consequential claim for arrears - relevant date form which the pension to be granted. HELD THAT - The principles underlying continuing wrongs and recurring/ successive wrongs have been applied to service law disputes. A continuing wrong refers to a single wrongful act which causes a continuing injury. Recurring/successive wrongs are those which occur periodically each wrong giving rise to a distinct and separate cause of action. This Court in Balakrishna S.P. Waghmare v. Shree Dhyaneshwar Maharaj Sansthan 1959 (3) TMI 53 - SUPREME COURT explained the concept of continuing wrong in the context of Section 23 of Limitation Act 1908 corresponding to section 22 of Limitation Act 1963. Where a service related claim is based on a continuing wrong relief can be granted even if there is a long delay in seeking remedy with reference to the date on which the continuing wrong commenced if such continuing wrong creates a continuing source of injury. But there is an exception to the exception. If the grievance is in respect of any order or administrative decision which related to or affected several others also and if the re-opening of the issue would affect the settled rights of third parties then the claim will not be entertained. In so far as the consequential relief of recovery of arrears for a past period the principles relating to recurring/successive wrongs will apply. As a consequence High Courts will restrict the consequential relief relating to arrears normally to a period of three years prior to the date of filing of the writ petition. In this case the delay of 16 years would affect the consequential claim for arrears. The High Court was not justified in directing payment of arrears relating to 16 years and that too with interest. It ought to have restricted the relief relating to arrears to only three years before the date of writ petition or from the date of demand to date of writ petition whichever was lesser. It ought not to have granted interest on arrears in such circumstances. Hence these appeals are allowed. The order of the Division Bench directing payment of disability pension from the date it fell due is set aside. As a consequence the order of the learned Single Judge is restored.

Summary

Issues:
1. Entitlement to disability pension from the date it fell due.
2. Application of the principles of continuing wrong and recurring wrongs in service law disputes.
3. Justification of directing payment of arrears for 16 years instead of restricting it to three years.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Entitlement to disability pension from the date it fell due
The respondent, a former Indian Army member, was invalidated from service in 1983 and sought disability pension. Initially, the High Court directed payment of disability pension for 38 months prior to the writ petition. However, the respondent appealed, arguing for entitlement from the date it fell due in 1983. The Division Bench allowed the appeal, granting pension from the date it fell due. The Supreme Court considered whether the High Court was justified in extending the arrears to 16 years instead of three.

Issue 2: Application of principles of continuing wrong and recurring wrongs
The Supreme Court referred to previous cases to explain the concepts of continuing wrong and recurring wrongs in service law disputes. Continuing wrong refers to a single act causing ongoing injury, while recurring wrongs are periodic acts creating distinct causes of action. The Court emphasized that a service-related claim based on a continuing wrong can be entertained despite delay, but reopening issues affecting third-party rights may not be allowed. The Court highlighted that claims related to pay or pension may be considered despite delay, while issues like seniority or promotion affecting others may be time-barred.

Issue 3: Justification of directing payment of arrears for 16 years
The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in directing payment of arrears for 16 years, stating that such a delay would affect the consequential claim for arrears. The Court emphasized that relief for arrears should typically be restricted to three years before the writ petition or from the date of demand to the writ petition, whichever is lesser. Therefore, the Supreme Court set aside the Division Bench's order and restored the Single Judge's decision regarding the payment of disability pension.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the order directing payment of disability pension from the date it fell due and restoring the Single Judge's decision.