JUDGMENT

B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.—These two appeals are preferred by the State of West Bengal and the Calcutta Municipal Corporation respectively against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court dismissing the appeal preferred by the Calcutta Municipal Corporation (F.M.A.T. No. 2347 of 1987) against the judgment of the learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition. The writ petition was filed by the respondents for issuance of writ of mandamus commanding the State of West Bengal and the Municipal Corporation to extend the benefit of pension under the Corporation of Calcutta Employees (Death-cum-retirement) Benefit Regulations, 1982 to them by declaring the date, April 1, 1977, specified in Regulation-I of Chapter I of said Regulations as non est and void. A mandamus was granted as prayed for, which was affirmed on appeal by the Division Bench.

2. Respondents 1 to 43 in both the appeals (writ petitioners) were the employees of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation. They retired from the Corporation service in the year 1967 or thereafter but prior to April 1, 1977. On retirement, each of the writ petitioners were paid the provident fund in accordance with rules then in force. Since no pension was provided for by the rules or regulations then in force they evidently did not claim and were not granted any pension. Whatever terminal benefits were payable to them were paid.

3. On the basis of the demand of the Corporation employees for payment of pension, the Government of West Bengal appointed in March 1978, a Pay Commission to examine the said claim and to make their recommendation. The Commission consisted of three members. It submitted its report on September 27, 1979. The three members submitted three different reports, differing with each other in certain particulars. The said reports were examined by the Government and accepted with certain modifications on April 27, 1981. On basis of the said acceptance, the aforesaid regulations were framed and published in the year 1982. The Regulations were given effect to from April 1, 1977. The Regulations provided inter alia that every employee who retired on or after April 1, 1977 can exercise the option in the prescribed pro forma within the time specified to come under the Pension Scheme. So far as persons retiring after the publication of the said Regulations were concerned, they were automatically governed by the said Regulations (Pension Scheme); there was no question of an option in their case. The Regulations were accordingly given effect to.

4. The writ petitioners (respondents 1 to 43 in these appeals) approached the High Court of Calcutta in the year 1985 for issuance of writ of mandamus applying the said Regulations to all those employees who retired even prior to April 1, 1977. The prayer was granted as prayed for. The High Court has mainly relied upon the decision of this Court in D.S. Nakara v. Union of India{(1983) 1 SCC 305}. The High Court was of the opinion that all the retired employees of the Corporation constituted one single class and classifying them into two categories with reference to April 1, 1977 is neither reasonable nor is it in any manner related to the object of the Regulations. The correctness of the said view is challenged in these appeals.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants, S/Shri S.B. Sanyal and D.N. Mukherjee relied strongly upon the later decision of this Court in Krishena Kumar v. Union of India{(1990) 4 SCC 207} a decision of the Constitution Bench. It is submitted that the specification of April 1, 1977 as the date from which the Pension Scheme provided by 1982 Regulation was to come into force was neither arbitrary nor discriminatory. The writ petitioners who had retired prior to April 1, 1977 and had drawn out the terminal benefits permissible to them, constituted a different class from those who retired after April 1, 1977 and were governed by Regulations. Counsel submitted that the High Court was not right in holding th