JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioners who are ex-employees of Nagar Palika (Municipal Board), Bharatpur have filed this writ petition seeking the relief of pensionary benefits on the grounds interalia that the petitioners retired from services of the Municipal Board, Bharatpur on 19.9.72, 30.9.79 & 30.6.82 respectively after attaining the age of superannuation. Subsequent to their retirement, the petitioners represented their case to the respondents for grant of pensionary benefits vide notice for demand of justice (Annexure-3) on the grounds inter-alia that the petitioners were members of the Municipal Board, Bharatpur and were also contributing to the provident fund but the State Government had denied the relief of pension on the ground that the said benefit could not be extended to the employee of the Municipal Board, Bharatpur since they were not covered by the Notification dated 26.5.84, which was published in the State Gazette on 17.9.87 on the ground that the benefit of the said Notification was available only to the employees of Ajmer and Marwar Municipal Board and only to those who retired on or after 30th September, 1987 and that the said benefit could not be extended to the employees of the Municipal Board who retired prior to the said date. Subsequent to the aforesaid representation some identically placed employees of the Municipal Association represented their case before the Municipal Board, who had been denied the pensionary benefits by the Board, by filing a writ petition before this Court and which came to be decided vide Order dated 26.2.91, passed in S.B.C.W.P. No. 288/89, wherein this Court while allowing the writ petitions had directed the State Government that no discrimination could be made in the matter of retired employees by fixing the dates arbitrarily as it would be violative of Rules 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. This Court further directed that while taking policy decisions in the matter of pensions, due respect is to be given to the aforesaid provisions of the Constitution in order to remove the vice of arbitrariness in the decisions of the Municipal Board. This Court further directed that while taking policy decisions in the matter of pensions, due respect is to be given to the aforesaid provisions of the Constitution in order to remove the vice of arbitrariness in the decisions of the Municipal Board. This Court while allowing the writ petition further observed as under : "The order dated 26.5.84 published in the Gazette on 17.9.87 denying the members of the petitioner association the pensionary benefits and the order dated 9.9.88 is declared to be discriminatory qua the members of the petitioner association and it is directed that they will be entitled to the same pensionary benefits as has been given to the erstwhile employees, who are members of the Municipal Services in Ajmer-Merwara. It is further directed that the contribution of the provident fund amount paid to the members of the petitioner association shall be adjusted towards the arrears of the total amount of pension to which they are found entitled from the date of entitlement. They shall also be entitled to be paid pension in future month by month in accordance with the provisions of the Rajasthan Service Rules with the benefit of commutation of pension etc. including all facilities which are being provided to the persons placed in similar situation." 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the relevant documents on the record as well as the ratio of the aforesaid decision of this Court. I am of the considered view that the petitioner deserves to succeed and the ratio of the aforesaid decision of this Court squarely covers the case of the petitioners. I am further of the opinion that it is not open to the respondents to discriminate the petitioner qua other similarly placed employees of the Municipal Board irrespective of the fact as to whether they have retired from Bharatpur or from any other district of Rajasthan, the only rider being that they should be the employees of the Municipal Board irrespective of the District from where they have retired. As regard the date of retirement, I am of the view that since the petitioner had retired prior to the issuance of the aforesaid Notification, he cannot be denied the pensionary benefits since there is no bar under the said circular for grant of pensionary benefits to the employees of the Municipal Board, who had retired prior to the said date. Since the said circular as referred to above has been held to be arbitrary by this Court irrespective of the bar contained in the said circular and its Government has already complied with the directions of this Court by extending the benefits to all similarly placed employees, the respondents are directed to comply with this order by preparing the necessary Pension Payment Order in favour of the petitioners within a period of 8 weeks from today. 3. The writ petition is accordingly allowed with no order as to costs.Petition allowed. *******