Commission Bearer service is reckonable at 50% for pensionary benefits, subject to verification of service records.

The original applicant, K.A. Kunjunni, claimed that he entered Railway service as a Commission Bearer on 14 March 1970 and was regularised as a Catering Service/Waiter on 14 March 1981. He retired on 31 August 2010. The Railways reckoned only his regular service for pensionary purposes and excluded his earlier service as a Commission Bearer, resulting in denial or reduction of pensionary benefits, including gratuity.

During the proceedings, Kunjunni died on 29 March 2020, and his legal heirs were impleaded.

Relying on earlier decisions concerning Commission Bearers and on Union of India v. Munshi Ram, 2023 (2) SLR 570 (SC), the applicants sought recognition of the pre-regularisation service for fixation of pay, pension, gratuity, MACP and other service benefits.

The Tribunal noted that, under the applicable legal position, 50% of qualifying service rendered as a Commission Bearer could be counted for pensionary benefits, but found that the applicant had not produced reliable records conclusively establishing the entire claimed period from 1970 to 1981.

The receipt relied upon by him contained apparent overwriting or interpolation.

The applicant had an admitted regular service of approximately 29.5 years, while 33 years of service was required for the relevant gratuity entitlement at the time of retirement.

Accordingly, at least seven years of qualifying Commission Bearer service would be material to his claim.

The order of absorption dated 6 March 1981 showed that he had sufficient prior service to be regularised and placed him at serial No. 32; the applicants also asserted that juniors in the same list had received gratuity and pensionary benefits.

Whether the applicant’s service as a Commission Bearer prior to regularisation could be counted, at least to the extent legally permissible, for determining pensionary and gratuity benefits.

Whether the applicant had established sufficient pre-regularisation service to bridge the shortfall between his admitted regular service and the service required for gratuity eligibility.

Whether the respondents were required to verify whether juniors included in the same absorption order had been granted gratuity and pensionary benefits and, if so, extend corresponding benefits to the applicant.

Whether the applicant was entitled to count the entire period from 14 March 1970 to 14 March 1981 for all service benefits, including MACP.

The Tribunal applied the principle, affirmed in Union of India & Ors. v. Munshi Ram, 2023 (2) SLR 570 (SC), that 50% of service rendered by Commission Bearers before their regularisation may be counted for pensionary benefits.

It relied on the earlier decision in Sivaraman & Ors. v. Union of India, T.A.K. No. 316/1987, and subsequent Tribunal decisions recognising the service relationship between Railways and Commission Bearers and treating eligible Commission Bearer service as reckonable for service benefits.

The Tribunal also observed that the legal question whether Commission Bearer service could be considered for pensionary and gratuity purposes was no longer res integra, having been settled by the Tribunal, the High Court and the Supreme Court.

However, entitlement depended on proof of the actual qualifying service and the relevant service records.

The Tribunal further held that the claim for MACP could not succeed merely on the basis of Commission Bearer service, in view of the Tribunal’s decision in O.A. No. 180/945/2019 and connected matters.

The Tribunal distinguished between the legal eligibility of Commission Bearer service to be counted and the factual proof of the applicant’s specific period of service.

Although the law permitted 50% of qualifying pre-regularisation service to be considered for pensionary benefits, the applicant’s principal difficulty was evidentiary: the receipt dated 14 March 1970 showed overwriting or interpolation, and the available records did not conclusively establish the complete eleven-year period claimed.

Nevertheless, the applicant had approximately 29.5 years of admitted regular service, and only seven additional qualifying years would be necessary to reach the 33-year threshold relevant to gratuity.

His placement in the 1981 absorption list also demonstrated that he had rendered sufficient prior service for regularisation.

Since he specifically claimed that juniors in the same absorption list had received gratuity and pensionary benefits, the Tribunal considered comparative verification by the Railways necessary.

It therefore directed the respondents to examine the records and determine whether the applicant was similarly entitled, while declining to grant automatic recognition of the entire claimed period or MACP benefits.

It held that Commission Bearer service could legally be relevant for pensionary and gratuity purposes, generally to the extent of 50%, but that the applicant’s entitlement depended on verification of the actual qualifying service.

The Railways was directed to verify whether juniors of the applicant included in the absorption order dated 6 March 1981 had been granted gratuity and pensionary benefits.

If that claim was found correct, the applicant’s legal heirs were to be granted the corresponding gratuity and pensionary benefits.

The exercise was ordered to be completed within three months from receipt of the order.

The O.A. was accordingly disposed of without an order as to costs.