STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. C R GANDHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is preferred under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgement and order passed by the learned City Civil Judge, Court No. 19, Ahmedabad in Civil Suit no. 946/1990 dated 24th March, 2000 by which the learned Judge partly allowed the suit of the respondent and held that the order passed by the appellant - State rejecting the request of the respondent for grant of compassionate pension is bad and illegal.

(2.) BEING aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Judge, the appellant - State has preferred the present appeal. The short facts, giving rise to the present appeal, are stated as under:

(3.) THE learned AGP appearing on behalf of the State vehemently submitted that the learned Judge has not interpreted Rule 274 of the Bombay Civil Services Rules in a proper perspective. On bare perusal of Rule 274 of the Bombay Civil Services Rules, it becomes clear that the government is given discretion for granting compassionate pension to the person who is removed or who is required to retire from government service on the ground of misconduct or insolvency. In view of the discretion vested with the Government, the Government thought it fit not to grant compassionate pension to the plaintiff, in view of grave charges levelled against the plaintiff in the departmental inquiry which was held against him. The learned AGP submitted that the State Government initially passed the order rejecting the request made by the plaintiff on 07/10/1985. After lapse of nearly two years, the plaintiff made a request on 17/03/1987 to reconsider the earlier order passed by the State Government on 07/10/1985. The State Government on reconsideration passed an order of rejection on 27/08/1987. The cause of action can be said to have been arisen to the plaintiff on 07/10/1985 and those facts were also reflected in the plaint filed by the plaintiff. On perusal of paragraph 11 of the plaint, it becomes clear that the cause of action had arisen on 04/02/1985 when the plaintiff was removed from service, on 08/07/1985 when the plaintiff applied to the government for compassionate pension and gratuity and also when the government rejected the application of the plaintiff on 07/10/1985. Thus, the learned AGP submitted that the period of limitation would start to run from 07/10/1985 when the application for compassionate pension was rejected by the State Government. As per Article 58 of the Limitation Act, the plaintiff ought to have filed the suit within the period of three years from 07/10/1985. As the suit was not filed in time, the learned Judge ought to have dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff on the ground of limitation. As the learned Judge has committed egregious error in holding that the suit is filed within time, the same requires to be reconsidered and the order passed by the learned Judge deserves to be quashed and set aside.