R.R.RASTOGI,J. - (1.) THESE two revision applications have been filed under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the Divisional Personnel Officer, Western Railway, Kota.
(2.) THE facts which have given rise to these revision applications briefly stated are that Amar Singh opposite party was employed as a Khalasi in the Western Railway and was posted at Agra. He had been appointed on 12-7-1962. On 18-2-1963 he was removed from service by an order passed by the Assistant Mechanical Engineer, Western Railway, Kota. He filed an appeal against that order before the Divisional Mechanical Engineer, Kota but to no effect. He then filed a civil suit for the declaration that the order terminating his services was illegal and infructuous. That suit was decreed by the learned Munsif, Kota on 18-12-1967. Thereafter an application under section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') was given before the City Magistrate, Agra, who is the Prescribed Authority under the Act. A sum of Rs. 2,304.79 was claimed by way of wages and allowance after deduction for provident fund contributions and compensation and that was for the period 18-2-1962 to 11-2-1965. It seems that the opposite party was taken back in service on 12-2-1965, and was paid his wages there­after. An application for condonation of delay under section 5 of the Limita­tion Act was also given. The Divisional Personnel Officer, who is the applicant before this Court, filed a written statement and pleaded, inter alia that the application was barred by time. The learned Prescribed Authority condoned the delay. Subsequently, after hearing the parties the claim as a whole was allowed for payment of Rs. 2,392.81 p. Two appeals were preferred by the Divisional Personnel Officer, one against the order condoning the delay and that was numbered as appeal no. 4 of 1968 and the other against the order allowing the claim of the opposite parties which was numbered as Appeal No. 2 of 1969. These Appeals come up for hearing before the Additional District Judge, Agra. On the question of condonation of delay, relying on a Division Bench decision of this Court in Satva Narain Lal v. Divisional Superintendent N. R. Allahabad and another(1969 A.L.J. 646), the learned Additional District Judge held that the cause of action for making an application for payment of wages arose after the decision of the civil suit and the application could have been filed with­in six months of the decree obtained by him and it was actually filed within that period. On merits of the claim it was contended before him on behalf of the Divisional Personnel Officer that the claim was barred by Order 2, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned Additional District Judge did rot accept this contention as well for there as on that the cause of action arose only after the decision of the civil suit. He, therefore, dismissed both the appeals. The present revision application have been filed against this combine order.
(3.) THE first submission made before me by the learned counsel for the applicant was that the courts below erred in condoning the delay and the view taken by them is wholly erroneous. I do not agree with this submission because this point is covered by a Division Bench decision of this Court in Satya Narain Lal's case (supra) and another decision of the Supreme Court in Divisional Superintendent, Allahabad v. Pushkar Dutt Sharma(1965 A.W.R. 274). What has been laid down in these cases is that it may be that the claim for payment of wages has to be made within 6 months (which period, by Act No. 53 of 1964 with effect from 1st February, 1965 has been made 12 months) from the date when the wages fell due and ordinarily an application under section 15(2) of the Act must be within the aforesaid period of the accrual of the cause of action counted month to month, but where the declaratory suit is filed challeng­ing the order of termination the cause of action of the employee to file an application under section 15 of the Act arises within 6 months of the decree made in that case. In the present case the application under section 15(2) of the Act was given within six months of the decree made in the civil case and hence the delay was rightly condoned and the grievance of the applicant to the contrary cannot be accepted.;