( 1 ) THE petitioner, in this petition, after having worked for 34 years, as an academician in the Faculty of Commerce of respondent No. 3-University, has not been paid the pensionary benefits, including gratuity and other incidental benefits, arising out of the service and employment with respondent No. 3, though she has retired almost 5 years before; and having failed in receiving due and payable pensionary benefits, and despite repeated and sincere efforts, as a measure of last resort, she has knocked the doors of this court by invocation of the provisions of article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia seeking directions against the respondent authorities for payment of retiral dues and benefits.

( 2 ) WITH a view to evaluate and examine the merits of the petition and the challenge against it, let there be, at the outset, spectrum of material facts and skeleton projection of the profile of the basis for claiming the pensionary benefits, which have been denied, despite the fact that the petitioner has retired almost 5 years before. Preambular Profile of Facts : after having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and considering the relevant and material facts emerging from the record of the present petition, the following aspects have emerged unquestionably : (i) On 15-06-1966, the petitioner had joined services as a Lecturer in the College, known as "p. D. Malaviya College of commerce" ("commerce College", for short ). (ii) On 08-07-1985, on the same date, when she was relieved from the Commerce commerce, she joined as Lecturer in the department of Commerce, Saurashtra university ("university", for short ). Let it, also, be mentioned that her services in the said earlier Commerce College came to be considered and treated as confirmed as "continuous Service" for service purpose, including the pensionary benefits, by virtue of Resolution No. NGC/1905 (84) KG dated 15-10-1984 of the Education Department, which means that the said period was to be considered towards the qualifying service period for consideration and fixity of the pension. (iii) At the time when the petitioner was serving in the Commerce College, she was having Contributory Provident Fund ("cpf" for short) Account, from which the petitioner received the amount when she left the said Commerce College. However, as per the aforesaid Resolution, dated 15-10-1984, the Pension Scheme was compulsorily introduced in the University and, therefore, the petitioner deposited all the benefits and amounts received towards "cpf" in the Treasury for payment to the government of Gujarat in the year 1989. (iv) The petitioner, inter alia has, also, pleaded, repeatedly, that at the time of joining the services of the University and thereafter, she, repeatedly, represented and approached the concerned officers of the said University for submitting the Option form with regard to her joining the Pension scheme. However, the said authority had not accepted the Option Form, but informed the petitioner that filing of the Option Form was not compulsory or mandatory in view of the aforesaid Resolution, by virtue of which the Pension Scheme was compulsorily introduced in the year 1982. (v) Thereafter, the petitioner thought it expedient and sought Voluntary Retirement from the service on 01-08-2000, which respondent No. 3, University, by its letter dated 09-09-2000 to respondent No. 2, director of Higher Education, requested to grant permission for Voluntary Retirement of the petitioner on 09-09-2000 which was, reiterated by respondent No. 3 University, by its letter dated 16-10-2000. (vi) Again, let it be noted on 24-10-2000, respondent No. 3-University had written a letter and requested respondent no 2, Director of Higher Education, to forward the Pension Papers of the petitioner with suggestion that no Option Form was required, as the compulsory Pension scheme was introduced in the respondent no. 3 University. (vii) On 30-10-2000, the petitioner i