Missing service records must be reconstructed to determine pension eligibility for compulsorily retired employees.

Facts

The applicant joined as an Assistant Engineer on March 10, 1977, and served until April 19, 1994, when a penalty of compulsory retirement was imposed

Source reference: p. 3, para. 2.1

The applicant claims 17 years of service, while the respondents acknowledged at least 15 years in a 2017 communication; both periods exceed the 10-year minimum qualifying service required for pension

Source reference: p. 3, para. 2.1

Despite the applicant’s entitlement, the respondents failed to settle retirement benefits, citing an inability to trace or reconstruct the applicant’s service records

Source reference: p. 4, para. 3.1

The applicant filed this Original Application (OA) seeking directions for the grant of pension, gratuity, dearness allowance, leave encashment, and the issuance of a Pension Payment Order (PPO)

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1

Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to pensionary benefits under Rule 40 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, following his compulsory retirement

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1

2. Whether the respondents, as custodians of service records, are obligated to reconstruct missing records to determine the applicant's qualifying service and entitlement

Source reference: p. 4, para. 2.2; p. 5, para. 4.1

Law Applied

The court considered Rule 40 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, which governs the grant of pension and gratuity upon compulsory retirement at a rate between two-thirds and full compensation

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1

It also referenced Rule 57(3) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, regarding the submission of written statements and affidavits by employees when service records are unavailable

Source reference: p. 4, para. 2.2

The matter was adjudicated under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1

Reasoning

The Tribunal observed that the respondents admitted the applicant had rendered at least 15 years of service, which satisfies the statutory requirement for pensionary benefits

Source reference: p. 3, para. 2.1

While the respondents argued that the service records were currently untraceable, the Tribunal emphasized that the respondents are the legal custodians of such records

Source reference: p. 4, para. 2.2, 3.1

The Tribunal reasoned that the matter could be resolved through a collaborative effort: the applicant would provide available documentation or affidavits to assist the respondents in reconstructing the service history

Source reference: p. 4, para. 3.2; p. 5, para. 4.1

By applying the principle that administrative delays or missing records should not indefinitely deprive an employee of earned benefits, the court determined that a time-bound direction for record reconstruction and a reasoned order was necessary

Source reference: p. 5, para. 4.2

Holding

The Tribunal disposed of the OA by directing a structured process for settlement: (i) Respondents must provide a list of required documents/assistance to the applicant within 10 days; (ii) The applicant must furnish available records within the following two weeks; and (iii) The Competent Authority must thereafter pass a reasoned and speaking order regarding the grant of pensionary benefits within two weeks

No order was made as to costs

Source reference: p. 6, para. 5