1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1779 OF 2007 Smt.S.S.Gaikwad. ...Petitioner vs. 1.The Executive Director, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd and others. ...Respondents. --- Mr.K.R.Yelwe, for Petitioner. Mr.S.S.Karkera, for Respondent nos.1 to 3. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED:15th September,2008. P.C.:- 1. The petitioner has filed petition challenging the decision communicated to him dated 29.9.2003. By that decision, the petitioner has been informed that 50% of his service rendered as temporary employee only can be taken into 2 consideration for pensionary benefit, and no part of his service rendered as casual employee can be taken into consideration for the purpose of pension. The petitioner was employed as casual employee on 1.1.1985. According to the respondents, the petitioner had been given temporary status on 1.10.1985 and he was regularised on 19.4.1995 and he retired from service on 31.8.2001. The respondents have filed their reply. Their initial stand was that only 50% of the casual services rendered by a temporary employee can be taken into consideration for the purpose of working out pensionary benefits. But now it appears from the letter dated 2.3.1998, a copy of which is at Exhibit R-2 to the reply filed by the respondents, shows that now their stand has changed and now according to the respondents 50% of the services rendered by the appointee who is appointed on casual basis can also be taken into consideration for working out pensionary benefits. It appears that this decision has been taken by the department pursuant to the decision given by the Central Administrative Tribunal. It appears that in view of the change in the stand of the respondents, 3 the case of the petitioner will have to be reconsidered by the respondents. 2. In our opinion, therefore, the following order would meet the ends of justice:- The decision communicated to the petitioner which is impugned in the petition, dated 29.9.2003 is set aside. The respondents are directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner for pension on the basis of the decision of the respondents contained in the letter dated 2.3.1998 a copy of which is at Exhibit R-2 to petition. The decision shall be taken as taken as expeditiously as possible in any case within a period of two months from today and shall be communicated to the petitioner immediately. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) 4 (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)