M.JAGANNADHA RAO, J. (1) SPECIAL leave granted. (2) THE claim of the appellants for entitlement to Type A quarters was rejected by the High Court. This appeal is against the said judgment. The appellants are ex-servicemen employed by Kandia Port Trust at Vadinar, District Jamnagar, Gujarat and receive their salary from Kandia Port Trust. They also receive pension from the Central Government. The entitlement of employees to various types of quarters is governed by rules and is based upon the "emoluments" received by them in the range given below: Type A up to Rs.500 Type ? from Rs.501 to Rs.1099 (3) THOSE who are receiving "emoluments" below Rs 500 are entitled to Type A quarters and those who are getting "emoluments" from Rs 501 to Rs 1099 are entitled to Type B. The appellants claimed that by adding the pension which they receive from the Central Government as ex-servicemen to their salary received from the Port Trust, they fall in the range of emoluments from Rs 501 to Rs 1099, entitling them to Type ? quarters. (4) THE learned single Judge has rejected the writ petition on the ground that the appellants would have to go before the Industrial Court. A Division Bench heard the appeal and by applying the amendment made to the Regulations on February 21, 1999, it stated that it was the "basic pay" that was relevant for the purpose of allotment of the type of quarters and not the total "emoluments". Learned counsel for the respondents Mr. P.H. Parekh submits that this amendment has been issued by way of clarification and is retroactive. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the amendment can only be prospective and the appellants are governed by the pre-amended Regulations in force when they filed the writ petition, which used the word "emoluments". (5) EVEN going by the unamended Regulations which use the word "emoluments", we are of the view that "emoluments" in the context of the Port Trust Rules mean "emoluments" received from Kandla Port Trust and cannot include the pension component which is received by the appellants from the Central Government towards their ex-military service. If that amount of pension is excluded, then in that event, even under the unamended Regulations, the appellants are not entitled to Type ? quarters. The appellants are not entitled to add up their pension received from a different employer for claiming Type ? If that amount of pension is excluded, then in that event, even under the unamended Regulations, the appellants are not entitled to Type ? quarters. The appellants are not entitled to add up their pension received from a different employer for claiming Type ? quarters. (6) THE appellants have, however, raised a further and just plea in their rejoinder that the respondents are deducting a higher amount towards licence fee for the quarters than payable if their entitlement is based only on the pay paid by Kandia Port Trust. They cannot make deduction towards licence fee which is applicable for the amount of "pay plus military pension". Learned counsel for the appellants contends that if the pension is to be disregarded for allotment of quarters, it should also be disregarded for the purpose of deduction from the licence fee. (7) LEARNED counsel for the respondents accepts this contention and states on instructions that the Port Trust is prepared to adjust the excess deduction of licence fee in future from the salary payable to the appellants. We record this statement made by the respondents and we accordingly direct that the excess deduction already made from the salary of the appellants towards the licence fee for quarters should be adjusted in the future salary that is payable to the appellants. (8) THE appeal is partly dismissed and partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.