Punjab State & Anr Vs. Darshan Kumar  INSC 618 (2 November
K. Ramaswamy, K. Hansaria B.L. (J)
1995 SCC Supl. (4) 220 JT 1995 (9) 130 1995 SCALE (6)479
O R D
this case, the respondent had filed the suit questioning the orders dated
19.5.76, 28.12.77, 13.10.78, 2.7.79, 18.5.84, 29.5.86, 8.10.87 and 3.11.88
passed by the competent authority, withholding the increments. The Civil Court considered the question of
limitation and held that since the procedure contemplated under the relevant
rules had not been followed in conducting the enquiry, the suit is not barred
by limitation. The Appellate Court has only stated that "no order was
have gone through the allegations stated in the plaint and written statement as
extracted in the judgment of the Trial Court. It does not appear that the
respondent had taken the plea that the orders were not communicated to him.
the suit was filed on September
25, 1989. Except the
orders of October 8,
1987 and November 3, 1988 all other orders were passed before
three years of the filing of the suit and are clearly barred by limitation.
these circumstances, the decree of the Trial Court is modified to the extent
that withholding of the increments by orders dated October 8, 1987 and November
3, 1988 are invalid in
law. In other respects, the claims are barred by limitation.
appeal is allowed accordingly. No costs.
Pages: 1 2