JUDGMENT :

(Vivek Chaudhary, J.)

1. Heard Shri Bhagwan Dutt Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner, Shri K.R. Singh, Advocate appearing for respondent no.3 and 4 and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

2. Petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order dated 16.10.2021 whereby the respondent authority has refused to grant him pension and other benefits on retirement which he claim to be entitled. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as work charge employee on 07.12.1987. He continued to serve on Class III Post as Clerk. He was treated as regular employee and was regularized by order dated 24.12.2010 and thereafter, he retired on 30.09.2016.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that he is entitled for pension under U.P. Development Authorities Non-Centralized Services retirement of Rules, 2011(Rules of 2011). Reference is made to Rule 2(h) to (i) which reads as follows:

"(h) "Pensionable post" means a post which fulfills the following three conditions, namely-

(i)the post is in any cadre of the Uttar Pradesh Development Authorities Non-Centralized Services

(ii)the employment is substantive and permanent, and

(iii) the service is paid by any