A. K. SIKRI, J. (ORAL) ( 1 ) PETITIONER is a Professor working in the Department of Philosophy of the Universityof Delhi. He retired on 31st October, 1994. Thereafter he was re-employed for aperiod of 3 years with effect from 1/11/1994. This writ petition was filed on 5/11/1996 when he was still working on re-employment. In the petition,petitioner has claimed the following reliefs: "1. Issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ to theuniversity of Delhi directing the University to (A) fix the pay of the petitioner as in October, 1994 at the basic of Rs. 5,400. 00- per month. (B) grant gratuity and the pensionary benefits to the petitioner on 32 yearsof service i. e. his continuous service from 14. 09. 1967 to 31. 10. 1994 plus fiveyears of added benefit of service for pensionary benefits. (C) grant him leave encasement of 240 days. (D) grant him commutation of pension after re-fixation of pension on 32years of his service and the appropriate fixation of his pay as on October, 1994at a basic of Rs. 5,400. 00 per month. (E) grant him arrears of pay, pension and gratuity on appropriate fixation ofpay. ( 2 ) AWARD interest 18% per annum to the petitioner on the delayed paymentsof his due gratuity , pension, leave encasement, arrears of pay etc. ( 3 ) AWARD damages/compensation as may be deemed appropriate and justby this Hon ble Court for the undue and avoidable delay by the Universitycausing agony and harassment to the petitioner. ( 4 ) AWARD the costs of this petition. "the occasion to file this writ petition with aforesaid prayers has arisen in thefollowing factual background. 2. Petitioner was first appointed as Teaching Assistant in the Department ofphilosophy, University of Delhi, with effect from 14. 09. 1967 and continued to work assuch up to 13. 12. 1968. He was appointed as Teaching Assistant after his selectionby a duly constituted Selection Committee and was given regular grade/scale of payapplicable to the said post. He was also granted annual increment and enrolled asmember of Contributory Provident Fund Scheme. With effect from 14. 12. 1968 hewas appointed as temporary lecturer in the same department against the vacancyand continued to work as such till 24/02/1970. The appointment to the postof temporary lecturer was also through regular selection process and he was givenannual increments during this period also. With effect from 14. 12. 1968 hewas appointed as temporary lecturer in the same department against the vacancyand continued to work as such till 24/02/1970. The appointment to the postof temporary lecturer was also through regular selection process and he was givenannual increments during this period also. He continued to contribute in thecontributory Provident Fund Scheme with effect from 25. 02. 1970, he was appointedas permanent lecturer and received promotions from time to time and finally retiredas Professor on 3 1/10/1994. 3. However, on retirement, for the purpose of fixation of pension, payment ofterminal dues including gratuity and leave encashment, the respondent/universityhas counted the period from 25. 2. 1970 when the petitioner was appointed aslecturer on permanent bases whereas the claim of the petitioner is that period from14. 9. 67 to 24. 2. 70 be also counted when petitioner worked as Teaching Assistantand Temporary Lecturer. Petitioner also claimed that he be given five years weightagefor pensionary benefits. 4. It is not necessary to go into most of these controversies as these stand settledduring the pendency of the petition. In fact on 22. 4. 97 statement was made bycounsel for the respondent, that whatever is due and payable to the petitioner shall bepaid to the petitioner within 2 weeks. Thereafter, on 13/05/1997 it was recordedthat petitioner was paid the amount of Rs. 79,920. 00 towards leave encasement,gratuity and pension and two outstanding issues which remained were regardingfixation of pay and 5 years benefit of service. Even Pay-Fixation was done and it leftwith only one dispute i. e. benefit of 5 years of added service. On 21. 7. 97 counsel forthe respondent made the statement that this point was also under active considerationof the department. ( 5 ) IT may be mentioned at this stage that the Vice-Chancellor had constituted a Committee headed by Professor Abad Ahmad, Pro-Vice-Chancellor to examine theissue relating to 5 years of added service under Clause 1 (h) of Statute 28 (a) of thedelhi University statutes. The Committee submitted its report dated 14. 3. 1997 and inthe said report it made the following recommendation: "the Committee, after deliberation, recommended that Prior to September,1991 the minimum qualifications for recruitment to the post of Lecturer waspost-graduate research and hence there was no problem with regard tocases of 1960s which coming up now is the Pension Cell for consideration ofthe benefit of added years of service. 3. 1997 and inthe said report it made the following recommendation: "the Committee, after deliberation, recommended that Prior to September,1991 the minimum qualifications for recruitment to the post of Lecturer waspost-graduate research and hence there was no problem with regard tocases of 1960s which coming up now is the Pension Cell for consideration ofthe benefit of added years of service. This provision would apply to all thosewho joined as Lecturers/readers/professors it will not apply to those whoinitially joined the University/college as Assistant Lecturers. Where as personinitially appointed as Assistant Lecturer is subsequently appointed as Lecturerthrough a selection committee, the benefit of added years of service wouldbe available with reference to the date of appointment as Lecturer. Suchperson could opt to forge that benefit and count. Instead, his/her service asasstt Lecturer tor pension if that is more beneficial. "this report was placed before the Executive Council and vide Resolution No. 12dated 3. 6. 1997. Council resolved to accept the recommendation of the Committee. This resolution of the Executive Committee alongwith the recommendation ofprofessor Abad Ahmad Committee has been filed by the University alongwith affidavitdated 15/10/1997 and it is stated that as per the said Resolution benefit of 5years of added service available to any one as Lecturer/reader/professor andwhere a person is initially appointed in any cadre every time benefit of added servicewould be available without reference to date of appointment as Lecturer. This wouldmean that a Teacher can either opt for his total service including that one before theappointment of Lecturer/reader/professor or to count the service as Lecturer/reader/professor with 5 years of added years of service. But both the benefits are notadmissible. ( 6 ) PETITIONER filed reply-affidavit dated 18/03/1998 in which he has submittedthat he was appointed as permanent Lecturer with effect from 25/02/1970and confirmed with immediate effect that earlier period of service rendered by him astemporary Lecturer from 14. 12. 68 to 24. 2. 1970 was treated as period spent onprobation. He has also submitted that as Teaching Assistant and temporary Lecturerhe was appointed by duly constituted Selection Committee, granted annual incrementand contributed to C. F^. F. and there was no disinterruption in service. Accordinglyunder Statute 28a 1 (h ). allservices rendered on a full time basis are to be countedas "qualifying service". Therefore his submission is that the aforesaid Resolution No. 12 dated 3. 6. F. and there was no disinterruption in service. Accordinglyunder Statute 28a 1 (h ). allservices rendered on a full time basis are to be countedas "qualifying service". Therefore his submission is that the aforesaid Resolution No. 12 dated 3. 6. 1997 of the Executive Council of the University is contrary to the Statute28 A 1 (h) of the Statutes and he is entitled to both the benefits namely counted entireservice from 14. 9. 67 to 31. 10. 94 as well as 5 years of added service. ( 7 ) STATUTE 28a 1 (h) defined qualifying service as under:- " (H) qualifying Service means service rendered by a person in a substantivecapacity including periods spent on probation. All service rendered to theuniversity on a full time basis in a temporary or officiating capacity followedwithout interruption by confirmation in the same or another post shall countas qualifying service except in respect of periods of service paid from contingencies . "it can not bedisputed that as per the aforesaid definition of qualifying service, itis the right of the petitioner to get the service rendered from 14. 9. 1967 to 24. 2. 1970 also counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pension. "it can not bedisputed that as per the aforesaid definition of qualifying service, itis the right of the petitioner to get the service rendered from 14. 9. 1967 to 24. 2. 1970 also counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pension. ( 8 ) AS far as the benefit of 5 years of service is concerned, for the purpose ofpension, this weightage is given to an employee in view of Note I appearing understatute 28a 1 (h) which reads as under: "an employee, who has not derived any form of retirement benefits fromsome other organisation before joining the service of the University of Delhi,shall be eligible to add to his service qualifying for superannuation pensionbut not for any other class of pension the actual period not exceeding one-fourth of the length of his service or the actual period by which his age at thetime of recruitment exceeded twenty five years or a period of five years: whichis least, if the post to which he is appointed is one: (a) for which post-graduate research, or specialised qualification, orexperience in scientific, technological or professional field is essential; and (b) to which candidates of more than twenty five years of age are normallyrecruited:provided that this concession shall not be admissible to an employee unlesshis actual qualifying service is not less than ten years,provided further that this concession shall be admissible only if the recruitment rules in respect of the said post contain a specific provision that the post isone which carries the benefit of this Clause. " ( 9 ) IT is not disputed that petitioner is covered by this note and therefore he isentitled to the weightage of 5 years service. The relevant consideration for giving thisbenefit is the nature of post to which he is appointed namely to a post for which postgraduate Reserach or specialised qualification or experience or scientific technologyor professional skill is essential and to which candidate of more than 25 years of ageshould normally-be recruited. Therefore the period of service rendered by the petitioneras Teaching Assistant and temporary Lecturer is counted on one consideration andweightage of 5 years service given to him, While calculating pension, on altogetherdifferent consideration. If the petitioner is held entitled to both the benefits on thebasis of aforesaid definition of qualifying service, then it cannot be said that he wasgiven only one out of two benefits. If the petitioner is held entitled to both the benefits on thebasis of aforesaid definition of qualifying service, then it cannot be said that he wasgiven only one out of two benefits. Resolution to the Executive Committee to theeffect that one can opt for one each of two benefits is therefore clearly contrary to thestatutes. ( 10 ) ACCORDINGLY this petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute. Respondents aredirected to fix the pension of the petitioner after adding 5 years of service to theservice rendered by the petitioner for the purpose of fixing his pension. This exerciseis to be done by the respondents within a period of 2 months from the date of receiptof copy of this judgment and the petitioner be given arrears of pension. The petitionershall not be entitled to any interest on the arrears of pension. If the same are paidwithin a period of two months. Otherwise interest at the rate of 12% per annum wouldbe given to the petitioner on these arrears with effect from I. I. I 997 (on taking intoconsideration that this writ petition was filed on 5. 11. 1996) till the date of payment ofthe arrears. No order as to costs.