- (1.) The present writ petition assails order dated 02.02.2015 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in O.A. No.114 of 2011 with directions to consider the representation of the respondent for stepping up of the pay scale.
(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that relief sought by the respondent for correction of pay scale was highly belated, preferred fourteen years after retirement and fifty two years from the date of cause of action. The direction to represent and to consider the same was in teeth of the law laid down in (2008) 10 SCC 115 (C. Jacob Vs. Director of Geology and Mining). It is next submitted that those who come to Court in time seeking relief and those who do not form separate class which is a valid classification under Article 14 of the Constitution to deny relief to the latter on basis of parity.
(3.) Counsel for the respondent submits that denial of the correct pay scale is a recurring cause of action as correctly held by the Tribunal. In any event, the Tribunal has only directed consideration of the representation. The writ petition merits no consideration as no positive directions have been given by the Tribunal for grant of any particular scale. Reliance is placed on (2008) 8 SCC 648 (Union of India Vs. Tarsem Singh) and AIR 1996 SC 669 (M.R. Gupta Vs. Union of India) that in a recurring cause of action the question of delay does not arise.;