JUDGMENT :

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1. The prayer in the instant writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 7.5.2002 conveyed on 31.05.2022 (Annexure P-14) and a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant him retiral benefits after calculating the same on the basis of last pay drawn by him such as gratuity, leave encashment etc. for the service rendered by him along with interest at the rate of 18% on delayed payment.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Geologist by the Government of India on 04.12.1965 pursuant to his selection by the UPSC. Thereafter the petitioner was transferred to the Haryana Industries Department, Government of Haryana and he joined his duty on 15.09.1970 without any break in service. Subsequently the petitioner was sent on deputation to the respondent- corporation on 27.10.1972. The Board of Directors of the respondent- corporation took a conscious decision to permanently absorb the petitioner as Senior Geo-Hydrologist-II. On his permanent absorption, the petitioner resigned from the Department of Industries and it was communicated that the terminal benefits admissible to him for the service rendered in the government department be given to him on his absorption in the corporation in public interest vide letter dated 21.02.1976 (Annexure P-5). The petitioner discharged his duties sincerely and earned promotion to the rank of Superintending Engineer and thereafter Director in the rank of Chief Engineer. The petitioner retired on 31.08.1999 on attaining the age of superannuation in the pay scale of Rs.18400-500-22400. The respondent corporation sanctioned a meagre amount of Rs.2,32,870/- as retiral benefits without taking into consideration the last pay drawn in the rank of Chief Engineer. Consequently, the petitioner submitted a representation which was rejected vide impugned speaking order dated 07.05.2002 (Annexure P-14).

2.1 Further, the Counsel submits that the petitioner was absorbed in the respondent corporation in public interest keeping in view his expertise and the petitioner has contributed in enhancing the functional capabilities of the respondent corporation. He further refers to Annexure P-5 i.e. letter dated 21.02.1976 and submits that the respondent corporation has sought the services of the petitioner on permanent basis and now cannot take a U-turn in denying the pensionary benefits after extracting his services. He further refers to the minutes of the meeting of the Board of Directors held on 20.06.1975 to submit that keeping in view the ground water exploration specialized subject, the Board of Directors clearly indicated that it is necessary to consider the permanent absorption of the petitioner so the functional working of the corporation is not disturbed. As such after utilizing the specialized and valuable expertise of the petitioner, he was never made aware that on superannuation he will not be entitled to any pension.

3. Per contra, learned State Counsel as well as counsel for the respondent refers to Annexure P-3 & P-4 and submits that the request of the petitioner was considered and only thereafter he was absorbed in the services of the respondent-corporation. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to any pensionary benefits in terms of Rule 6.16(2) of the CSR as the pensionary benefits are accruable only to such Government employees who acquire the requisite qualifying service of 10 years. It remains uncontroverted that the petitioner resigned from the Industries Department on his own accord on 28.12.1975 after his initial joining on 16.09.1970. As such, the petitioner has not completed the qualifying service in terms of Rule 6.16(2) ibid. Further, the petitioner has admitted in his writ petition in para 18 that he had served the Central Government for more than 10 years and