IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 9078 of 2008. Decided on: 27th June, 2011. H. R. Kalia ….. Petitioner. Versus Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Krishi Vishva Vidyalaya and ors. …… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr.Ranjan Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Lokender Thakur, Advocate Sanjay Karol.J. (Oral) According to the learned counsel for the parties, the matter in issue is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court in B. C. Katoch vs. The H.P. Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, CWP (T) No. 4136 of 2008. 2. It is not in dispute that petitioner retired as a Dean of the respondents-University on 31.8.1982 and also served as a Vice Chancellor upto 31.10.1983. His claim for pension stands rejected vide Annexure A-5 for the reason that the Scheme is applicable only to those employees who had retired between the period 1.1.1986 to 1.1.1997. 3. In some what similar circumstances, wherein an employee who had retired from the very same University on 30.6.1984 and was seeking benefit of the same 2 Scheme, this Court in B. C. Katoch (supra) has held as under:- “4. The Pension Rules, which are relevant for disposal of the present petition are parimatria to those involved for consideration of this Court in HRTC Retired Employees Union (supra). It being so, the present case is also in a way covered under this judgment. Further more, in view of the averments set up by the petitioner, vide para (6) (xxiv) (l) of the petition that apart from him, there are only four other surviving pre 1.1.1986 retirees, who have been left out from the purview of the aforesaid Pension Scheme, which averments have not at all been replied on behalf of the respondent-University. 5. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner is granted benefit of the aforesaid Pension Scheme issued by the respondent-University, vide notification dated 1.1.1997, Annexure A/1 and the Rules framed thereunder, vide Annexure A/2. The respondent-University is directed to process the pension case of the petitioner in the light of this judgment and to release the consequential financial benefits to him under the said Scheme and the Rules framed thereunder with effect from 1.1.1986, within a period of three months from today. It is made clear that the amount of the benefits already received by the petitioner under the CPF Scheme shall be liable to be adjusted against the benefits accruing to him as per this judgment.” 3 4. In view of the aforesaid, impugned order (Annexure A-5) is quashed. Respondents are directed to process the petitioner’s case for grant of pension in accordance with the scheme and the rules. The directions issued in B. C. Katoch (supra) to the extent applicable, shall mutatis mutandis apply to the instant case also. However, necessary action shall be taken by the respondents-University within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. 5. With the aforesaid observations, petition stands disposed of. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 27th June, 2011 ( Justice Sanjay Karol ), (rana) Judge.