SANKARI GHOSH Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition the only issue that arises for consideration is whether the claim of interest made after 10 years on the delayed payment of retiral benefits ought to be allowed.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner contends that it is an admitted position that the petitioner retired on 31st January, 2000 and the pension payment order was issued on 16th January, 2002 and within two months of the issuance of the pension payment order that is on 26th March, 2002 the retiral benefit was paid to the petitioner. As the petitioner was entitled to payment of retiral benefits forthwith or maximum within a period of 30 days and admittedly, the said was not done the petitioner is entitled to payment of interest on and from the date of retirement till payment was made to the petitioner in March, 2002. The contention of the respondent authorities is that in view of Section 3 of the Limitation Act which entitles a person to seek remedy within three years from the date, the cause of action arose, in the instant case the cause of action arose in 2002 and the application has been filed after 10 years therefore on the ground of delay alone this application be dismissed.

(3.) IN reply counsel for the State respondents submits that the entitlement to interest may be a fundamental right and can be invoked at any time as generally fundamental right is not bound by any restriction and is uncontrolled. Delay and limitation are synonymous terms and although Section 3 of the Limitation Act is not to apply to writ proceedings, the principle of delay can be considered. (2011) 1 WBLR Cal. 486 is distinguishable on facts as delay was not in issue. (2008) 3 SCC 44 for the same reason is also distinguishable. (2007) 1 CLJ 21 was a case of custodial death and delay was being considered in that context therefore the said decision is distinguishable. AIR (1992) SCW 3181 is also distinguishable and the delay issue in the light of the decisions cited by the State respondents be considered.