JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by P.B.BALAJI, J.)

The State Bank of India/respondent in the W.P.No.26367 of 2021, aggrieved by the order in the said writ petition dated 06.11.2023, is the appellant herein.

2.We have heard Mr.S.Raveendran, learned Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Bazeerahamed, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.Anil Bajaj, learned counsel for the respondent.

3.Mr.S.Raveendran, learned Senior Counsel would challenge the findings of the Writ Court directing sanction of pension to the writ petitioner and would submit that in terms of Rule 22 of the State Bank of India (SBI) Employees' Pension Fund Rules, only on completion of 20 years pensionable service, pension would be provided to the employee who has attained the age of 50 years. He would also place reliance on Rule 7 of the Pension Fund Rules states that an employee is entitled to become a member of the pension fund from the date on which his services in the Bank are confirmed or the date from which he may be required to become a member of the fund under the terms and conditions of his services. He would further place reliance on Rule 20 which says that save as provided in Rule 21, with effect from 01.11.1993,