JUDGMENT - V.G. PALSHIKAR, J.:---Both these petitions raise identical questions of law for adjudication and, therefore, are disposed of by this common order. All the three petitioners in these two petitions are employees of the Reserve Bank of India and have resigned from their service after rendering service of more than twenty years. After resignation, they have claimed pensionary benefits which were rejected by the Reserve Bank of India by passing appropriate orders. This rejection is questioned in both these petitions.

2. In Writ Petition No. 615 of 1996 the petitioners have claimed a declaration that Regulation 18 of Pension Regulation, 1990 be declared unconstitutional as it is unreasonable, arbitrary and discriminatory whereas the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2586 of 97 has claimed that Regulation 26(3-A) of the Reserve Bank of India Staff Regulations, 1948 is not prospective in nature and, therefore, petitioner is entitled to grant of benefit of pension as his resignation is equivalent to voluntary retirement. The petitioners have, therefore, challenged by these petitions the rejection of their claim for pensionary benefits.

3. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2586 of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document