SHARANJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved against the concurrent findings of fact, recorded by both the learned courts below, plaintiff has approached this Court by way of instant regular second appeal, in his suit for declaration claiming arrears of salary on account of alleged difference of pay and allowances w.e.f. 13.1.1969.

(2.) BRIEFLY put, facts of the case are that appellant was appointed as Drawing Instructor in the Department of Technical Education and Industrial Training, Punjab w.e.f. 10.7.1965. The cause of action became available to the plaintiff -appellant, as submitted by learned senior counsel for the appellant, in the year 1971. Plaintiff retired from service on 30.4.2011 after attaining the age of superannuation. Present suit was filed on 23.7.2005. Suit was dismissed by the learned trial Court and the first appeal filed by the plaintiff was also dismissed by the learned District Judge. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned State counsel submits that the suit of the plaintiff was hopelessly time barred. Issue of limitation was specifically raised. Thereafter, issue No. 3 framed by the learned trial Court to the effect that whether the suit was within limitation period and onus thereof was rightly put on the plaintiff. However, plaintiff -appellant failed to prove that his case was within limitation. She further submits that litigation between other allegedly similar employees and the State will not provide a fresh cause of action in favour of the plaintiff. Plaintiff came to the Court after an inordinate long period of about 34 years and there was hardly any explanation for this inordinate delay. She also submits that learned courts below have rightly appreciated the true facts of the case as well as settled principles of law applicable thereto and the appellant was rightly non -suited . She prays for dismissal of the appeal.