Judgment

S. C. AGRAWAL, J. - This appeal, by special leave, raises the question whether the benefit of addition to his qualifying service under Rule 30 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) can be availed by a person who was already employed as a Government servant when he was appointed to the service or post referred to in Rule 30.

2. The respondent was employed as Investigator in the National Sample Survey with effect from May 8, 1956. While thus employed he was selected for the post of Labour Officer, by way of direct recruitment through the Union Public Service Commission, and having been appointed on the post of Labour Officer; he joined the said post on May 16, 1960. The respondent has retired from service in August, 1985. The period of service from May, 8, 1956 till May 16, 1960, when he was working as Investigator in the National Sample Survey was included in his qualifying service. He, however, claimed further benefit of addition in qualifying service under Rule 30 of the Rules which claim of the respondent was not accepted by the authorities and thereupon he moved the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short the Tribunal). The said application of the respondent was allowed by the Tribunal by order dated July 12, 1988. The tribunal has directed the appellants to give to the respondent the benefit of addition of computed number of years to his qualifying service as permissible under Rule 30(1) of the Rules. Feeling aggrieved by the said decision of the Tribunal, the appellants have filed the present appeal.

3. Rule 30(1) of the Rules, as it stood at the relevant time, provided as under:-

"30. Addition to qualifying service in special circumstances :-

(1) A Government servant appointed to a service or post after the 31st March, 1960. shall be eligible to add to his service qualifying for superannuation pension (but not for any other class of pension) the actual period not exceeding one-fourth of the length of his service or the actual period by which his age at the time of recruitment exceeded twenty-five years or a period of five years, whichever is less, if the service post to which the Government servant is appointed is one-

(a) for which post-graduate research, or specialist qualification or experience in scientific, technological or professional fields, is essential; and

(b) to which candidates of more than twenty-five years of age are normally recruited:

Provided that this concession shall not be admissible to a Government servant unless his actual qualifying service at the time he quits Government service is not less than ten years:

Provided further that this concession shall be admissible only if the recruitment rules in respect of the said service or post contain a specific provision that the service or post is one which carries the benefit of this rule:"

4. Shri V. C. Mahajan, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellants, has urged that Rule 30 is applicable only in cases where a Government servant joins Government service on the service or post referred to in the said rule and it does not apply to a person who is already in service and has been appointed to the service or post referred to in the rule while employed as a Government servant. The submission of Shri Mahajan is that if the benefit of Rule 30 is made available to a person who prior to his appointment to a service or post referred to in rule 30 was already employed with the Government he would avail double benefit in the matter of computation of his qualifying service which is not envisaged by Rule 30.

5. Since the respondent has failed to appear in spite of service and the question involving interpretation of Rule 30(1) of the Rules is likely to affect a large number of persons, the Legal Aid Society of the SC was requested to nominate a senior counsel to assist the court and in pursuance of the said request, Shri K. K. Venugopal has appeared and made his submissions.

6. Shri Venugopal has urged