( 1 ) THE petitioner has filed the abovementioned Special Civil Application challenging the action of the Railway administration retiring the petitioner on completing the age of 58 years on 31-3-1981. Case of the petitioner is that he being the employee of the erstwhile Bhavnagar State Railway was entitled to serve upto 60 years which benefit remains vested in him and therefore he cannot be superannuated at the age of 58 years as per the correct interpretation of Rule 2046 (F. R. 56) read with the rules of Ex-Bhavnagar State known as Age Limit Rules of 1919.

( 2 ) AT the time of admission of the abovementioned Special Civil Application this Court on 23-3-1981 issued Rule and ad-interim relief against the retirement of the petitioner till 31-3-1983 was granted. This ad-interim relief was confirmed on 6-4-1981 by this Court. Thereafter this matter was pending. However on 23-3-1983 the Railway Administration filed a Civil Application No. 1359 of 1983 for getting the interim relief vacated or suitably modified and that the petitioner be allowed to be retired on 31-3-83 as per the extant Railway Rules. This Court therefore by order dated 24-3-1983 vacated the interim relief with effect from 31-3-1983. However the Special Civil Application was kept pending and is still pending till today.

( 3 ) AS the pension and other retirement benefits because of the pendency of the petition of the petitioner before this Court are not being fixed by the Railway Administration the petitioner has filed this Civil Application No. 4315 of 1983 for a direction to the Railway Administration to fix the pension and to give other retirement benefits to the petitioner forthwith. On this Civil Application rule was made returnable on 16-1-1984. Thereafter this matter was adjourned from time to time.

( 4 ) THE petitioner in the Civil Application has submitted that on from service the petitioner is entitled to the amount of provident fund gratuity leave encashment amount payable on maturity of the Group Insurance Scheme and also the fixation of pension in accordance with the Railway Rules. The petitioner submitted that he had approached the Railway authorities to fix his pension and other retirement benefits but he has been told by the Railway authorities that till his petition is pending in the High Court his pension cannot be fixed and his service benefits cannot be finalised. Under these circumstances the petitioner has filed this Civil Application for the reliefs as stated in the Application The petitioner has submitted that thus he is being denied the retirement benefits to which he is entitled to forthwith. Learned Advocate for the petitioner has submitted before me that the petitioner should be allowed to withdraw the main petition to enable him to get retirement benefit immediately.

( 5 ) LEARNED Advocate Mr. R M. Vin appearing for the Railway Administration submitted that the petitioner will be only entitled to the retirement benefits on the basis as if he retired from service on 31 and not on the basis that he retired on 31-3-1983 even though to 31-3-1983 and has served the Railway Administration.

( 6 ) IT is surprising to note that even though the Railway Administration has prayed in Civil Application No. 1359 of 1983 to vacate or suitably modify the interim order passed by this Court and to allow the Railway Administration to retire the petitioner on 31-3-1983 as per the extant Railway Rules and got the interim relief vacated with effect from 31-3-1983 no action appears to have been taken for fixing the pension gratuity and other retirement benefits to the petitioner. The Railway authorities are under the statutory obligation to give all the benefits to the petitioner on his retirement from service. It may be noted here that the petitioner was in the continuous service of the Railway Administration and the Railway authorities having allowed to work and having taken the work the petitioner till 31-3-1983 and the petitioner having cont