Mihir Kumar Rana vs The Durgapur Projects Limited & ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1641 Cal

     64
29.03.2022
 Ct. No.23
     pg.
                        IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                       CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
                                APPELLATE SIDE

                                  WPA 5347 of 2022

                                 Mihir Kumar Rana
                                        Vs.
                         The Durgapur Projects Limited & Ors.


                       Mr. Siddhartha Sarkar
                                  ... For the petitioner
                       Mr. Sujit Shankar Koley
                                   ... For the respondents

Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on

record.

The petitioner is a retired employee of Durgapur

Projects Limited (in short "DPL"), the respondent no.1, who

retired from services on 28th February, 2014. The

petitioner is claiming interest on delayed payment of

gratuity and leave salary. The petitioner on his retirement

was entitled to payment of gratuity and an amount on

account of leave salary aggregating to Rs.7,48,689/-. This

figure is not in dispute. The petitioner was paid this

amount on 24th November, 2014. The date of payment is

also not in dispute. The petitioner says that there has been

a delay of about 9 months in making of the said sum of

Rs.7,48,689/- on account of gratuity and leave salary. The

petitioner, therefor, was entitled to interest for delayed

payment of gratuity as per the provisions of Section 7(3A)

of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred

to as the "said Act") and interest on the same rate on leave

salary since the same is part of the retiral benefits.

The petitioner's cause to claim the principal sum

has accrued for the first time after his retirement on 28th

February, 2014. On the payment of the principal sum the

petitioner's cause to claim interest accrued on 24th

November, 2014. The wrongful act that caused an injury

was complete on 24th November, 2014. There is no

continuing wrong even though the damage resulting from

the act may continue. The injury caused by the wrongful

act does not continue. Thus, there is no continuous cause

to enable filing of the writ petition after eight years, the

writ petition having been filed only on 24th March, 2022.

There is, as such, a long delay in filing the writ petition

which disentitles the petitioner from claiming interest.

Although, the issues relating to claim of interest for

delayed payment as in the instant writ petition are

squarely covered by a recent judgment and order of this

Court dated 9th August, 2021 passed in WPA 11485 of

2021 (Kajal Pal v. The Durgapur Projects Ltd. & Ors.), but

the enormous delay in approaching the Court, however,

disentitles the petitioner from claiming interest. Nothing

has been pleaded to show that the petitioner's claim is a

continuing cause. In absence of the same the writ petition

is liable to be dismissed for long delay and laches on the

part of the petitioner in view of the ratio laid down in 2008

(8) SCC 648 (Union of India And Others vs. Tarsem Singh)

and 2016 (13) SCC 797 (Asger Ibrahim Amin vs. Life

Insurance Corporation of India) which, according to me, is

applicable in this case.

The writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no

order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if

applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of

necessary formalities.

(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)