Court directs consideration of service book reconstruction and annual increments.

The applicant, Bilal Ahmad Bhat, was appointed as a Constable in the J&K Police Department on December 23, 1999, and performed his duties diligently.

In 2008, an FIR (No. 03 of 2008) was registered by the Crime Branch, Srinagar, concerning alleged irregularities in appointments, leading to the seizure of the applicant's service book along with others.

The investigation concluded in 2022 with a challan submitted to the Competent Court, where a criminal trial is currently sub-judice and the complainant has turned hostile.

The Trial Court directed the release of the service books for one month, but the Superintendent of Police Kulgam/Pulwama observed that the applicant's service book was not in clear condition and could not be used, recommending its rebuilding.

Furthermore, the original service book was destroyed and washed away during the 2014 Kashmir Valley floods when floodwaters entered the Crime Branch office where the record was kept.

The applicant subsequently submitted a representation to the respondents for the reconstruction of his service book and release of annual increments, which has not been considered.

1. Whether the respondents have a statutory duty to reconstruct the applicant's service book and release annual increments, especially when the original records were lost due to reasons beyond the employee's control?

2. Whether the applicant's representation for reconstruction of his service book and release of annual increments should be considered by the respondents?

The court primarily considered Rule 257 of the J&K Financial Code, which outlines the employer's statutory duty to maintain, preserve, and reconstruct service records, including service books, particularly when such records are lost or destroyed due to circumstances beyond the employee's control.

The court also acknowledged the general principle of the employer's legal obligation to create and maintain an employee's service record for an uninterrupted service.

The court's analysis focused on the applicant's uninterrupted service despite the pending criminal proceedings, coupled with the undisputed fact of the service book's destruction due to the 2014 floods.

It linked the respondents' inaction in reconstructing the service book to a violation of their statutory duty under Rule 257 of the J&K Financial Code.

Recognizing the limited prayer from the applicant's counsel to treat the O.A. as a representation, the court refrained from commenting on the merits of the case but emphasized the respondents' obligation to consider the applicant's request in accordance with applicable rules and instructions.

The court implicitly held that the employer's duty to maintain service records persists even when records are lost under unforeseen circumstances, such as floods, and that the pendency of criminal proceedings does not negate the requirement to reconstruct the service book, although the reconstruction itself can be subject to the outcome of those proceedings.

The respondents are ordered to accord due consideration to the averments made therein, along with the applicant's prior representation dated January 15, 2019, regarding the reconstruction of his service book and release of annual increments, in accordance with applicable rules, law, and circulars.

A speaking and reasoned order must be passed within four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.

However, the court explicitly held that the reconstruction of the service book is subject to the final outcome of the criminal proceedings pending before the Court of Law.