N. V. DABHOLKAR, J. :- By this writ petition, petitioner challenges parts of Government resolutions dated 18-8-1987; 11-10-1998 and 3-10-1988.

By Government resolution dated 18-8-1987, in the Department of Finance, and more particularly by Clause 3.1 of the same, the term "pensionable pay" is restricted to "pay" as defined in Rule 9 (36)(i) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 (henceforth referred to as "Pension Rules" for the sake of brevity), thereby excluding personal pay, special pay and any other emoluments specially classified as "pay", which were till then included in the said term "pay".

By resolution dated 11-10-1988, Government of Maharashtra in the Finance Department fixed 1-9-1988 to be the date for giving effect to the recommendations of Fourth Central Pay Commission regarding enhancing the ceiling for accrual and encashment of unexhausted earned leave at the time of retirement on superannuation to 240 days from the then existing 180 days.

By resolution dated 3-10-1988 issued by Finance Department of the State; similarly 1-9-1988 is the date fixed for giving effect to revised rates of travelling allowance/detention allowance, transfer grants, etc.

2. Petitioner was a member of State judicial service, who had resumed on 12-9-1956 and retired on superannuation on 31-1-1988. While he was serving as Chief Judicial Magistrate at Latur in the year 1984, the High Court, through its Registrar, was pleased to call for willingness for ex-cadre posts of Judge, Labour Court; Member, School Tribunal, etc. While calling such willingness, the details regarding service conditions of those ex-cadre posts including special pay, deputation allowance and such basic information was furnished. Service condition for Judge, Labour Court was "incumbents of the post will draw their grade pay plus special pay of Rs. 150/- per month and all other allowances admissible under the orders of Government issued from time to time." Petitioner communicated his willingness vide letter dated 25-7-1984. Respondent No.2, secretary to the Government of Maharashtra in the Industries, Energy and Labour Department, vide order dated 21-1-1985, appointed petitioner as a Judge of the Labour Court at Latur. Even this letter of appointment clearly stated that petitioner would be allowed to draw his grade pay plus special pay of Rs. 150/-. The special pay was subsequently raised to Rs. 300/- per month with effect from 1-1-1986 with a view to attract the Judges from regular judiciary to labour judiciary.

Rule 9(36) of Pension Rules, which defines "pay" includes "special pay".

Rule 60 of the said Rules defines "pensionable pay" as "pay as defined in Rule 9 (36)". Thus, "special pay" is required to be included as "pay" for the purpose of calculation of pensionable pay."

While deducting 10% house rent, since petitioner was occupying Government quarter during the service, this "special pay" drawn by the petitioner was added to his basic pay and, thus, an amount of Rs. 30/- per month was deducted towards house rent allowance from his special pay of Rs. 300/-, in addition to 10% of basic as per grade pay.

Since petitioner was due to retire on superannuation with effect from 31-1-1988, his pension case was considered by respondent No.3 as Head of the Department and pension papers were forwarded to Accountant General II, Nagpur, vide letter dated 27-4-1987. "Pensionable pay" was calculated by adding special pay of Rs. 300/- to the basic as per grade pay, while forwarding the pension case.

The office of Accountant General II failed to pay pension, gratuity, etc. till March, 1988. At the insistence of the petitioner, respondent No. 3 granted provisional pension at Rs. 1915/- per month and gratuity of Rs. 62,000/- vide order dated 9-3-1988. The provisional pension so granted was by incorporating special pay of Rs. 300/- as part of pensionable pay.

Accountant General II, Nagpur, issued pension payment order dated 19-4-1988 fixing the pension of pet