(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.) 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.