A. K. SIKRI, J. (ORAL) ( 1 ) PETITIONER was working in Central Reserve: Police Force from where he retiredon 31/12/1996 on attaining 55 years of age aftercompleting 31 years, 9months and one day s service. He is being given the pension but full pension is notreleased to him. His contention is that since he had completed 30 years of servicebefore retirement he is entitled to full pension. On the other hand respondents standtaken in the courier-affidavit is that as per the petitioner had not completed 33 yearsof service, which is maximum service provided under the Rules, petitioner is notentitled to full pension and pro rata pension on the basis of length of service renderedby the petitioner is correct. ( 2 ) THE question involved is no more res integra and has been decided by thiscourt in number of cases and copies of these orders are annexed with the petition. Particulars thereof are asunder: 1. Birbal Ram Sharma Vs. UOI and Others in CWP 935/92 dt. 20. 12. 92high Court of Jammu and Kashmir, at Jammu. 2. Shri Sant Ram Vs. Union of India and Others CWP NO. 4208/94, dt. 13. 10. 95 by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi. 3. It is further contended by the respondents that in view of specific stipulation in the rules of the respondent i. e. Rule 49 (2) (b) of CCS (Pension) Rules which stipulates 33years service for being eligible to maximum pension, the claim of the petitioner is notcorrect. It is further submitted that in the aforesaid judgments, this point was notargued or considered. However, this contention of the respondent specifically cameup for consideration before another Bench of this Court in Civil Writ No. 2421/97entitled as S. S. Ranade and Others Vs. Union of India and Others and repelling thisargument, this Court held that petitioner would be entitled to full pension aftercompleting 30 years of service. Relevant portion of the said judgment reads asunder: "6. It is not in dispute that the petitioners are the retired BSF personnelsuperannuated at the age of 55 years admittedly completing more than 30years of service but less than 33 years of service. It is also not in dispute that CCS (Pension) rules 1972 are applicable to BSF personnel and the rulerelevant for the present purpose is Rule 49 (2) (B) which reads as follows:- "49. Amount of pension. (1 ). . . . . It is also not in dispute that CCS (Pension) rules 1972 are applicable to BSF personnel and the rulerelevant for the present purpose is Rule 49 (2) (B) which reads as follows:- "49. Amount of pension. (1 ). . . . . . . . (2) (a ). . . . . . . . (b) In the case of a Government servant retiring in accordance with theprovisions of these rules before completing qualifying service of thirty-threeyears, but after completing qualifying service of ten years, the amount ofpension shall be proportionate to the amount of pension admissible underclause (a) and in no case the amount of pension shall be less than (rupeesthree hundred and seventy-five per mensern; ( 7 ) IT may be appreciateated that CCS (Pension) Rules 1972 speak ofsuperannuation age of the Government servants to be 58 years and keepingin view the superannuation of Central Government employees coveredunder the said Rules. Rule 49 (2) (b) reproduced above, provides for qualifyingservice of 33 years for claiming full pension. ( 8 ) IN the case of Raghunandan Lal Chaudhary and others Vs. Union ofindia (supra), the supreme Court, while dealing with the writ petition ofdefence personnel under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, consideredthe provisions contained in Sections-18,25 of the Army Act and held that "thequalifying service for pension should be 30 years when retiring age is fixed at55 years and the pension equivalent of Gratuity is recoverable from1. 1. 1986. . . . . There can also be no dispute that pension equivalent of gratuitywill be recoverable from 1. 1. 1986. The only other question which requiresdetermination is whether the appropriate period of service should be 30years or 33 years. At the relevant time when each of the petitionerssuperannuated, the retiring age was 55 years. We are of the view that theperiod of qualifying service as indicated therein should be therefore be 30years. "it is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that respondents have complied withthe aforesaid judgment and did not prefer any appeat against the same. ( 9 ) WRIT petition is accordingly allowed. Respondents are directed to refix thepension entitlement of the petitioners on the basis of the qualifying service for fullpension being 30 years and more. "it is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that respondents have complied withthe aforesaid judgment and did not prefer any appeat against the same. ( 9 ) WRIT petition is accordingly allowed. Respondents are directed to refix thepension entitlement of the petitioners on the basis of the qualifying service for fullpension being 30 years and more. The respondents are further directed to pay thearrears of unpaid pension, as above, within a period of three months from today;failing which the petitioners would be entitled to 12% interest on the amount due andpayable, as above from the date of their entitlement till the actual payment is made bythe respondents to each of the petitioner. No order as to costs.