Retrospective pension amendment invalidity required condonation of delay and extension of the same consequential relief.

A retrospective amendment to Rule 2544 of the Indian Railways Establishment Code, affecting the calculation of average emoluments and running allowances for pension, had already been held invalid for breach of Articles 14 and 16. On that basis, similarly situated employees were entitled to the same consequential pensionary relief, and delay in approaching the Tribunal should not stand in the way where the underlying entitlement had been judicially recognised. The Tribunal's dismissal was set aside, the application was allowed, and consequential pension benefits were granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the application before the Tribunal should have been condoned, and whether the appellants were entitled to the same relief as had been granted by the Full Bench in relation to the retrospective amendment of Rule 2544 of the Indian Railways Establishment Code.

Issue (i): Whether the delay in filing the application before the Tribunal should have been condoned.

Analysis: The appellants had sought relief on the basis of the invalidity of the retrospective amendment already recognised by the Full Bench and affirmed by this Court. In the circumstances, the delay in approaching the Tribunal ought not to have been treated as a bar to relief.

Conclusion: The delay should have been condoned.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellants were entitled to the same relief as had been granted by the Full Bench in relation to the retrospective amendment of Rule 2544 of the Indian Railways Establishment Code.

Analysis: The retrospective amendment affecting the calculation of average emoluments and running allowances had already been held invalid so far as its retrospective operation was concerned, on the ground of violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The appellants, being similarly placed, were entitled to the same consequential benefit in pension matters.

Conclusion: The appellants were entitled to the same relief as granted by the Full Bench.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the Tribunal's dismissal was set aside, the application was allowed, and the appellants were granted consequential pensionary relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a retrospective service condition affecting pensionary benefits has already been judicially held invalid, similarly situated claimants should not be denied relief merely on the ground of delay if the circumstances justify condonation.

---