JUDGMENT

KULDIP SINGH J.—Special leave granted.

2. Applications for impleadment are allowed.

3. The appellant was in the service of the Central Government for a period of about 15 years. He was thereafter permanently absorbed in a public undertaking, from where he retired on April 1, 1984. The question for cur consideration is whether the appellant on absorption in the public undertaking was eligible for pro rata pension and death-cum-retirement gratuity based on the length of his qualifying service under the Government till the date of absorption.

4. The appellant was serving the Audit Department (Defence Service) of the Government of India as Substantive Upper Division Clerk. He was sent on foreign service to Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. (public sector undertaking) on January 9/10, 1961. He was permanently absorbed in the public undertaking with effect from August 1, 1964. It is not disputed that the appellant, having joined Central Government service on July 25, 1949, had completed 15 years of pension able Government service. On the date of appellants permanent absorption in the public undertaking the retirement benefits were regulated by memorandum dated November 10, 1960 issued by the Ministry of Finance (Department of Expenditure), New Delhi. According to the said memorandum the retirement benefits for service rendered by a Government servant before his absorption in a public undertaking, were admissible equal to what the Government would have contributed had the individual been on contributory provident fund terms, with 2% simple interest thereon. The Government of India subsequently issued memorandum dated June 16, 1967 providing revised terms and conditions of absorption in Central Public Sector Undertakings but restricted the revised benefits only to those who were absorbed on or after June 16, 1967. The operative features of the revised instructions were as under:

(i) A permanent Government servant with not less than 10 years qualifying service on absorption in public undertaking was eligible for pro rata pension and death-cum-retirement gratuity based on the length of his qualifying service under Government till the date of absorption. The pension was to be calculated on the basis of average emoluments immediately before absorption.

(ii) The pro rata pension, gratuity, etc. admissible in respect of the service rendered under the Government was disbursable only from the date the Government servant would have normally superannuated had he continued in service.

5. The appellant retired from the public undertaking on April 1, 1984. It is not disputed that on January 15, 1974 the appellant was paid a sum of Rs 3036 as retirement benefits in terms of the memorandum dated November 10, 1960. The benefit of the revised terms and conditions of absorption as contained in the Government memorandum dated June 16, 1967 was denied to the appellant on the short ground that he was absorbed in the public undertaking prior to the date of coming into force of the said memorandum.

6. The appellant filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on October 19, 1984 in the Madras High Court seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to grant him pro rata pension and all other benefits admissible under the revised memorandum dated June 16, 1967. As an interim measure the High Court directed that the appellant be paid 50 per cent of the pro rata pension and other pensionary benefits under the memorandum dated June 16, 1967 from the date of his absorption in the public undertaking. The writ petition was transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras. The Tribunal by its judgment dated June 14, 1988 dismissed the application and rejected the claim of the appellant. This appeal by way of special leave is against the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal.

7. The appellant has questioned the validity of the condition imposed in the memorandum dated June 16, 1967 making the memorandum applicable only to s