ORDER

1. Special leave granted.

2. The appellant sought premature retirement from government service after he had put in 18 1/2 years of service in two different departments under the Central Government. Although a request for premature retirement could be made only after 20 years of government service but the Union of India granted premature retirement to the appellant at a stage when he had served the Government for 18 1/2 years. The question for determination is whether the appellant is entitled to any pensionary benefits. The Central Administrative Tribunal rejected the claim of the appellant.

3. Dr Anand Prakash, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Union of India, has contended that on 7-3-1980 when the appellant was prematurely retired he had put in 18 1/2 years of quasi-permanent service. According to him, to earn pension it was necessary to have a minimum of 10 years of permanent service. It is contended that since the total service of the appellant was in quasi-permanent capacity he was not entitled to the pensionary benefit. There is nothing on the record to show as to why the appellant was not made permanent even when he had served the Government for 18 1/2 years.