N. J. PANDYA, J. ( 1 ) ).- With the consent of the parties the matter is taken up for final hearing. The petitioner was admittedly appointed by respondent no. 1 corporation as per Annexure A page 13 way back in the year 1963. In the year 1989 when he wanted to have voluntary retirement he submitted an application and thereafter it seems that the difficulty has started. All of a sudden he came to know that he ceased to be an employee and no one is prepared to accept him to be the employee of either the Surat Municipal Corporation-respondent no. 1 or the District Primary Education-respondent no. 2 or respondent no. 3 the Trust that had taken over the management of Deaf and Dumb School and lastly the State of Gujarat represented through the Directorate of Social Welfare Department-respondent no. 4. At the fag end of his service therefore the petitioner who as working till he decided to retire voluntarily has found out that on the one hand he is an employee and on the other hand he has no employer in relation to whom he can be said to be an employee. This is indeed a very peculiar situation. ( 2 ) ). However as per Annexure A page 13 right from the beginning as per Resolution No. 65 passed on 21-10-1963 the petitioner has been appointed as Acharya i. e. Principal of Deaf and Dumb School run by the respondent-Corporation. ( 3 ) ). An agreement came to be entered by and between respondents no. 1 and 3 on 13th August 1979 copy of which is at Annexure C page 18 onwards. The Corporation is referred therein as party of the first part throughout the agreement and respondent no. 3 as party of the second part. For the petitioner paragraph 17 at page 22 internal page 5 is very important. As stated therein the responsibility of the employees of the School has been taken over by respondent no. 3 but at the same time whatever contribution is received from employee in the fund of pension gratuity leave contribution of GPF etc. on being recovered by respondent no. 3 was to be paid regularly in the treasury of respondent no. 1 Corporation every month. As if this is not enough it has been clearly stated by respondent no. 3 but at the same time whatever contribution is received from employee in the fund of pension gratuity leave contribution of GPF etc. on being recovered by respondent no. 3 was to be paid regularly in the treasury of respondent no. 1 Corporation every month. As if this is not enough it has been clearly stated by respondent no. 3 when it forwarded the application for voluntary retirement under its letter dated 30th August 1989 that the petitioner has never opted for being an employee of the trust i. e. respondent no. 3. ( 4 ) ). Respondent no. 3 continued to remind respondent no. 1 that the question of voluntary retirement of the petitioner should be decided by respondent no. 1 but for some unexplained reasons respondent no. 1 sat right over it. Finally by passage of time even ordinarily a date came by which the petitioner would have retired had he continued to serve either with respondent no. 1 directly or with respondent no. 3-School. ( 5 ) ). The solitary stand taken by the Corporation is that of denial of any relationship of employer and employee as set out in the affidavit in reply at page 43 onwards. Curiously enough at page 49 the deponent Mr. K. F. Patel incharge Administrative Officer has come out with a stand in para 7 at page 49 of his affidavit in reply that it is the Social Welfare Department who has appointed the petitioner as Principal with effect from 1-7-1981. This is contrary to the record already referred to above. Annexure A-page 13 is clear and right from the beginning the petitioner was working as Principal of the Deaf and Dumb School. After the said agreement entered into in the year 1979 which was to hold the field for a period of 5 years from 1981 there would have been no occasion therefore for the Social Welfare Department-respondent no. 4 to appoint the petitioner as a Principal. ( 6 ) ). The stand of the Social Welfare Department is very clear. They say that if a recognised institution is there admissible grant is being sent to the concerned Institute or the establishment through them and beyond that there is no responsibility of the Department. They also stated that the petitioner was never an employee of the State of Gujarat in its Social Welfare Department. ( 7 ) ). They say that if a recognised institution is there admissible grant is being sent to the concerned Institute or the establishment through them and beyond that there is no responsibility of the Department. They also stated that the petitioner was never an employee of the State of Gujarat in its Social Welfare Department. ( 7 ) ). Annexure-A page 13 clearly says that the petitioner started his service life as an employee of respondent no. 1 Corporation. He continued to be so because no option was obtained from him nor was he called upon to exercise one ( 8 ) ). L. A. Miss Shah appearing for the petitioner has submitted that as the petitioner had opted for voluntary retirement he had stopped working from that date and therefore he has not received any salary. As and when his claim for pension is admitted by whichever authority or as and when the Court allows the petition in favour of the petitioner fastening the liability of the pension on any of the respondents the same should be made payable from the date dial he had opted for voluntary retirement this date being 18-9-1989. ( 9 ) ). Accordingly the petitioner is entitled to receive pension from 18-11-1989. In other words he was taken to have voluntarily retired from that date. The responsibility is that of respondent no. 1 - Corporation. It shall therefore compute the pension of the petitioner on and from that date and pay the entire amount of arrears within a period of six months. So far as the prospective payment is concerned it shall start paying provisional amount of Rs 1500/- on and from 1st of April 1994 It shall be adjusted towards the final amount that may be arrived as a result of the said calculation to be carried out within said period of six months. Difference if any between the provisional amount paid and the final amount calculated shall also be paid within one month thereafter. If as a result of the said calculation the amount payable is found to be less than the provisional amount the. same shall be adjusted towards arrears. Rule is made absolute. No order as to costs. Petition Allowed. .