Employer’s failure to maintain service records cannot prejudice an employee’s vested right to pensionary benefits.

The applicant is the widow of Late Sh. Gujjar Mal, who joined Northern Railway in 1957 and was terminated in 1980 for participating in a strike

Following the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in Union of India v. R. Redappa, the deceased employee was reinstated

While his initial challenge for consequential benefits (O.A. No. 47/1996) was dismissed, a subsequent collective application (O.A. No. 4011/2010) was allowed by the Tribunal and upheld by the Supreme Court, directing the release of service benefits to similarly situated employees

The respondents failed to release the benefits to the applicant’s husband during his lifetime, citing the non-availability of service records

After his death in 2021, the applicant obtained the service records through an RTI request, yet the respondents continued to withhold the benefits, citing the finality of the 1996 dismissal and alleged suppression of facts

1. Whether the applicant, as a widow, is entitled to the consequential service and pensionary benefits of her deceased husband despite the respondents' plea of missing service records.

2. Whether the claim is barred by the principles of res judicata, suppression of material facts, or the finality of earlier adverse proceedings.

The court applied Rule 14(2) of the Railway Servant (D&A) Rules, 1968, and the precedent set in Union of India v. R. Redappa regarding the reinstatement of employees

It relied on the principle that the maintenance of service records is an exclusive administrative obligation of the employer, and lapses therein cannot prejudice the employee

Furthermore, the court applied Article 14 of the Constitution of India, holding that selective implementation of judicial orders among similarly situated employees is discriminatory

It also affirmed the established legal doctrine that pensionary benefits are a vested right accruing from past service rather than a matter of grace

The Tribunal found the respondents' defense of "missing records" to be untenable and "falsified" by the fact that the applicant successfully obtained those very records via RTI in 2021

The court reasoned that administrative apathy or failure to reconstruct records cannot be used to defeat a legitimate claim

Addressing the legal bars, the Tribunal rejected the plea of res judicata, determining that the non-payment of pension and consequential benefits constitutes a "continuing wrong" and that the subsequent grant of benefits to similarly situated peers created a fresh cause of action

The court emphasized that denying the applicant benefits that were extended to others, pursuant to the same judicial directions, was "patently arbitrary" and violated the right to equality

The respondents were directed to compute and release all arrears (pay, pension, gratuity) within twelve weeks, along with interest at GPF rates from the date the amounts became due

The court further ordered the respondents to ensure regular future pension payments to the applicant without delay