As per case facts, petitioner applied for higher pension after a Supreme Court judgment, but the application was rejected by the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) because the employer failed ... to provide certain records like Form 6A and monthly challans, citing unavailability due to transition to online systems. The petitioner argued that as an employee, they cannot be penalized for the employer's failure to maintain records and that other available documents like Form 3A and EPF account statements should suffice for verification. The question arose whether an employee's claim for higher pension could be denied solely due to the employer's inability to produce specific records like Form 6A and challans, despite other reliable evidence being available to substantiate contributions. Finally, the Court ruled that pension is an earned right, not a favor, and technical deficiencies or missing employer records should not defeat a genuine employee's claim for social welfare benefits. It emphasized that the authority must consider all available cumulative material, including Form 3A and EPF account statements, and not reject the claim on form over substance. The Court directed the EPFO to reconsider the application, utilize alternative verification methods, and ensure the benefit is not denied due to administrative lapses or missing records if the entitlement can otherwise be established.