STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARY....Respondent(s) Appearance: MR DIPEN DESAI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR HS SONI AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER Date : 01/07/2013 CAV JUDGMENT Rule. Mr. Soni, learned AGP, waives services of notice of Rule for the respondent State. 1.1 The petitioner has approached this Court by invoking Article 226 & Article 14 of the Constitution of India upon feeling aggrieved by order dated 28.6.2012 and also by the inaction of the respondents in not finalizing his claim and entitlement for 1/3rd commuted pension. 2. So as to justify his claim and request, the petitioner has mentioned following facts. 2.1 According to the details mentioned in the petition, it emerges that the petitioner was initially appointed in December 1967 as Assistant Technical Inspector (ClassIII) under Director, Food & Supplies Department. Subsequently, when an independent corporation in name and style of Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation was formed in 1980, the employees of abovementioned Directorate were placed under deputation with the corporation. Orders placing the employees, including the petitioner, on deputation were passed in October 1980. 2.2 Subsequently, the Government decided, and for that purpose resolved, to call for options from the said deputationist as to whether they would prefer to be absorbed and continue with the corporation or would prefer to be reverted to the parent department or any other department with the Government. 2.3 The petitioner has claimed that within prescribed time limit (for submitting the options), he had submitted his option for being absorbed in service with the corporation. 2.4 One of the conditions which was prescribed in the resolution inviting options was to the effect that the employees who opt to continue with the corporation shall not resign from their service with the corporation for a period of 2 years without permission from State Government otherwise they would not be entitled for pentionery benefits. 2.5 After considering the options exercised by the deputationists, the Government passed further resolution dated 5.12.1988 absorbing the petitioner and other employees in the corporation. A consequential order dated 13.12.1988 was passed by the corporation absorbing the petitioner and other employees with the corporation. 2.6 Similarly, the Government also passed a resolution dated 16.11.1989 resolving that those employees who are absorbed in the corporation vide order dated 5.12.1988 shall be deemed to have retired from Government service w.e.f. 4.12.1988. 2.7 As a consequence of the said orders and resolutions, the petitioner was granted and paid all benefits (in 1991) which accrued to him on account of the resolution dated 16.11.1989 whereby the employees absorbed in the corporation were deemed to have retired from Government service. 2.8 About three years thereafter, i.e. on or around 7.12.1994, the petitioner, for his personal reasons, resigned from service of the corporation. His resignation became effective from 16.1.1995. 2.9 After about 7 years, since his retirement, the petitioner submitted an application in December2011 claiming 1/3rd commuted pension. The petitioner has claimed that his said request has been rejected by the State Government vide order dated 28.6.2012 wherein, the State Government has cited resolution dated 1.4.1989 and informed the petitioner that since he resigned from the service of the corporation after having been absorbed, he is not entitl