RENUKA MALI Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Review applicant seeks review of the order dated August 25, 2023 by which WP.ST 149 of 2019 was disposed of.

(2.) Learned advocate appearing for the review applicant submits that, the review applicant was granted compassionate appointment on October 1, 1999. Review applicant superannuated in 2007. Review applicant was entitled to compassionate appointment much prior to 1999 and, therefore, review applicant was entitled to notional benefit at least from 1995. On grant such notional benefit, review applicant will come within the zone of consideration for pension, which she was denied due to her inadequate period of service, counting the period of her service from October 1999 till her superannuation in 2007.

(3.) Learned advocate appearing for the review applicant submits that, the learned Tribunal erred in not considering the fact, that non-grant of the pension was a continuing wrong and that the original application before the Tribunal was not barred by limitation. He relies upon (1995) 5 SCC 628 (M.R. Gupta vs. Union of India and Ors.), (2008) 8 SCC 648 (Union of India and Ors. vs. Tarsem Singh) and (1996) 8 SCC 637 (Pilla Sitar am Patrudu and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors.) in support of his contention that when there is continuing wrong, there is no question of limitation.