The court established that the clause restricting membership under the medical benefit scheme to retired employees with 30 years of pensionable service was reasonable and not violative of constitutional provisions.

( 1 ) A retired employee/officer of state bank of india, is before this court inter alia seeking the following reliefs: (A) to issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order to quash the impugned communication dated October 4, 1996 issued by the third respondent in No. Br/geri/262 (Annexure-B ). (B) to issue a writ of certiorari quashing Rule 3 (1) (a) of the state bank of India retired employees' medical benefit scheme to the extent it imposes condition of 30 years of pensionable service to be entitled for the benefit of the scheme and consequently, declare and direct respondents to treat those, who are eligible for payment of pension under the state bank of India employees' pensionary fund rules as eligible to the membership of the state bank of India retired employees' medical benefit scheme. (C) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to amend the rules governing the membership to the state bank of India retired employees' medical benefit scheme to the effect that those employees, who have retired/will retire, who are eligible for the payment of pension under the state bank of India employees' pension fund rules, will be eligible to the membership of the state bank of India retired employees' medical benefits scheme. (D) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction, directing the respondents to admit the petitioners to the membership of the state bank of India retired employees' medical benefit scheme and to confer all the benefits available under the scheme on the petitioner.

( 2 ) THE facts in nutshell are: petitioner had joined the services of the respondent-state bank of India (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as 'bank'), as probationary officer on November 14, 1963. After successful completion of probation, he was confirmed in the post by respondent-bank. After completing 29 years and 5 months of service, when he was working as general manager (inspection), he sought for voluntary retirement from service. The competent authority of the bank, permitted the petitioner to retire from service voluntarily and he was relieved from service at the close of business hours on April 30, 1993. After his retirement from service, the bank has sanctioned and paid his terminal benefits which he was entitled to under service rules and the employees pension fund rules of the bank.

( 3 ) THE bank has introduced a scheme called "state bank of India retired employees' medical benefit scheme" (for short "medical scheme"), which has come into force with effect from July 1, 1996. The object of the scheme is to provide financial assistance in meeting, partly or fully, within the specified limits, hospitalisation expenses for treatment of specified diseases/ailments to retired employees and their spouses, where expenditure involved is large and the treatment is taken at hospitals/nursing homes, which have been approved by the bank for that purpose. Clause 3 of the scheme provides for membership. The same is relevant for the purpose of this case and therefore, it is extracted and it reads as under:"3. Membership - (i) only those existing and future pensioners of ibi/sbi who satisfy any of the following conditions will be eligible to be members of the scheme: (A) those who retire or have already retired from the bank on completion of 30 years of pensionable service. (B) those who have been/will be allowed to retire from the bank's service on medical grounds in terms of Rule 19 (iii)/22 (ii) of ibi/sbi employees' pension funds rules. (C) those who have retired/will retire on attaining the superannuation age of 58 years or 60 years provided they have put in atleast 10 years of pensionable service. (II) employees who have been discharged/dismissed/removed from service/compulsorily retired or their services have been terminated on grounds of misconduct, will not be eligible. (III) the retired employees who have taken up commercial employment for t