LAWS(BOM)-1997-10-132

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. KASHINATH DAGADU SANAP

Decided On October 12, 1997
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Appellant
V/S
Kashinath Dagadu Sanap Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff (respondent herein) was employed as a junior accountant in the office of the Divisional Forest Officer at Vyara in Dhulia district. In 1951, he was drawing in all Rs. 200 per month in the scale of Rs. 100 -8 -140, inclusive of allowances etc. A charge -sheet came to be framed against him on September 12, 1951 and after inquiry, he was dismissed from, service by an order dated July 15, 1954. The plaintiff then initiated Suit No. 316 of 1956 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhulia, (1) for declaration that the order of dismissal was void being in violation of Article 311 of the Constitution, as also (2) for the arrears of salary up to the date of the suit. This suit was decreed on December 30, 1957 and the decree was confirmed in appeal on August 31, 1959 and also in Second Appeal on September 26, 1965 by this Court. It is common ground that he was thereafter reinstated on January 10, 1966. The plaintiff then filed the present suit on December 24, 1966 in forma pauperis claiming arrears of salary from February 25, 1956 till the date of the suit. He claimed in all Rs. 41,488 calculating the same on the footing of what he would have received at enhanced rates, in the ordinary course, but for such wrongful dismissal, by way of increments, and also on promotion, from the date from which his immediate junior was promoted.

(2.) THE defendant denied the liability, on several grounds, including the one of limitation as to the arrears for more than three years before the date of the suit, and another that increments on promotion and enhanced salaries on account thereof, cannot be claimed as a matter of course. Reference to other points is irrelevant as none were argued before us.

(3.) MR . Bhonsale, the learned Government Pleader for the State drew our attention to the judgment) of this Court in the case of Dr. V.D. Angal v. The State : (1968)IILLJ177Bom , and the unreported cases referred to therein, as also to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Jai Chand Sawhney y. Union of India : [1970]3SCR222 , and several unreported judgments following the same, and contends that, Government servants claim to arrears of salary is held to have been governed by Article 102 of the repealed Limitation Act of 1908 corresponding to Article 7 of the present repealing Act, and the Courts are held incompetent to pass decrees for arrears of more than three years prior to the date of suit. He, therefore, contends that the decree, to the extent to which it covers arrears of pre -December 24, 1963 period, is liable to be set aside. Mr. Deshmukh, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent, relies on the judgment in State of M.P. v. State of Maharashtra : (1977)IILLJ369SC , hereinafter referred to as 'the Recent case' in support of the decree passed. This was an appeal by the State against the judgment of the Nagpur Bench of our Court in State v. Sarjoo Prasad Gumasta [1968] Bom. 1024, which has taken a different view from the one followed in other cases when Jai Chand's case was not even decided, much less reported. Mr. Bhonsale, however, sought to distinguish the present case as Jai Chand's case is not overruled but expressly distinguished, in para. 33 of the 'Recent case' and contends that the ratio of Jai Chand's case still holds the field.