(1) SPECIAL leave granted. (2) THE respondent was appointed as a police constable in the Malabar Special Police on 24-8-1939. On 2-9-1949, he was discharged from service when he did not agree to continue on the expiry of his initial term of appointment. According to the rules, gratuity was payable on such discharge and the same was paid. The rules in vogue at that time made a person eligible for the grant of pension only if he had put in 20 years of service. As the qualifying service had not been rendered by the respondent, he was not paid any pension. (3) THE Madras Liberalised Pension Rules were promulgated in 1960 and they were made applicable to the Malabar Special Police personnel from 1965. This also provided that a person would get pension if he had put in 10 years of service. On 6-11-1992, the respondent made a representation that he should be granted pension. On the same being rejected, OA was filed in 1996 challenging the order dated 10-11-1993 whereby the representation was rejected. The Tribunal has allowed this OA. Hence, this appeal. (4) FROM the facts enumerated hereinabove, it is clear that on the date when the respondent left the police service in 1949, he was only entitled to gratuity. This gratuity was received by him and no representation was made till 1992 laying claim for pension. The rules which allowed pension to be given on a person rendering 10 years of service were made applicable to the serving police personnel of the Malabar Special Police with effect from 1965. The claim of pension is under the Madras Liberalised Pension Rules which themselves came into existence in 1960. Neither in 1960 nor in 1965 was the respondent in service. The right with regard to retirement benefits came into existence on 2-9-1949 and the respondent was paid whatever was due to him on that date. We fail to understand as to how the Rules of 1960 could be made applicable to the respondent who had left the police force as far back as 1949. Reliance on the decision of this Court in Nakara case is completely misplaced. (5) ACCORDINGLY, this appeal is allowed and the judgment of the Tribunal is set aside. There will be no order as to costs.