Past service rendered through proper channel counts for financial upgradation and pensionary benefits.

The applicant was appointed as a Junior Engineer (JE) with the Public Works Department (PWD) on 12.12.1983

He resigned through the proper channel and joined the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) on 14.05.1986 without a break in service

While the DDA issued a circular on 28.01.2008 allowing the counting of past service for pension and Assured Career Progression (ACP) benefits, the applicant's prior service with the PWD was not credited

The applicant took voluntary retirement in 2008 and received benefits based only on his DDA service

DDA (Respondent No. 1) maintained that it could not count the past service because PWD (Respondent No. 2) failed to transfer the requisite pro-rata pension contribution/Leave Salary and Pension Contribution (LSPC) despite multiple reminders

The applicant filed the present O.A. seeking a direction to count his past service for ACP and revised pensionary benefits, accompanied by an application to condone a 555-day delay in filing

1. Whether the 555-day delay in filing the Original Application should be condoned.

2. Whether the applicant is entitled to have his past service with the PWD (1983–1986) counted for ACP and pensionary benefits by the DDA.

3. Whether the transfer of LSPC by the previous employer is a mandatory prerequisite for the current employer to grant service benefits.

The Tribunal primarily applied the principle that grievances related to pay and pension are "continuing in nature," justifying the condonation of delay

It relied on the DDA Circular dated 28.01.2008, which explicitly allowed the counting of past service for employees joining through the proper channel

The Tribunal distinguished the DoP&T O.M. dated 30.05.1995, noting it applies to the mobility of personnel between Central Government and Autonomous Bodies, whereas the PWD (GNCT of Delhi) is a government department, making said O.M. inapplicable

The Tribunal first addressed the procedural delay, ruling that because the matter involves pay upgradation and pension—matters of continuous grievance—the delay of 555 days deserved condonation

On the merits, the Tribunal noted that the PWD had verified the applicant’s service details but failed to respond to the DDA’s requests for LSPC transfer or the Tribunal's notices, leading to the forfeiture of its right to file a counter-reply

The Tribunal rejected the DDA’s reliance on the 1995 DoP&T O.M. because the PWD is not an autonomous body

Since the DDA admitted the applicant’s entitlement to the benefits contingent upon the receipt of LSPC, and the PWD had failed to fulfill its inter-departmental obligation to transfer those funds, the Tribunal determined that the applicant should not be penalized for administrative lapses between two government entities

It held that the applicant is entitled to the counting of his past service for ACP and pension purposes

The Tribunal directed Respondent No. 2 (PWD) to transfer the applicant’s LSPC to Respondent No. 1 (DDA) within four weeks

Upon receipt, Respondent No. 1 was directed to pass a reasoned order regarding the due dates of the 1st and 2nd ACP, revise the applicant's pension, and release all consequential arrears within twelve weeks

No order as to costs was made