Judgment R.M.Prasad, J. 1. In the writ petition the petitioner is aggrieved on account of denial of the benefit available under Rule 27(B) of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Employees) Pension Rules, 1995 (Referred to as the Rules). 2. In short, the relevant fact is that the petitioner was initially appointed in the Life Insurance Corporation on 4th February, 1965 as Field Officer, and superannuated from service on 31-1-1991, as Development Officer. The Life Insurance Corporation of India (Employees) Pension Rules, 1995 has also been made applicable to employees who were in service of the Corporation on/after 1st day of January, 1986 but had retired on 1st day of November, 1993 and exercised an option in writing 120 days from the notified date to become member of the fund. Admittedly, the petitioner under the said Rules become eligible for grant of superannuation pension and was paid the same since his retirement. 3. According to the case of the petitioner, as at the time of initial appointment he was above 28 years of age, he is entitled to get the benefit of qualifying service under Rule 27(B) of Chapter IV of the Rules. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that under similar circumstances the said benefit has been granted to other employees of the Corporation. However, the petitioner has not specifically pleaded about the grant of benefit under Rule 27(B) of the Rules to other employees of the Corporation who are similarly situated. 4. Having regard to the said claim, Mr. Singh learned Senior Caunsel for the Corporation, has fairly agreed for disposal of the writ petition with a direction that the petitioner may file representation giving details of such grant to other similarly situated employees before the authority concerned whereupon the authority concerned shall consider the same and dispose of and grant the benefit to the petitioner also, if any other employee has been granted the same benefit under similar circumstances. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also agreed for disposal of the writ petition accordingly. 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also agreed for disposal of the writ petition accordingly. 5. The writ application is thus disposed of with the direction that the petitioner shall file representation before the authority concerned giving full details about any other person who has been granted the benefit under Rule 27(B) of the Rules under similar circumstances within four weeks from today, whereupon the authority concerned shall consider the same and dispose it of by a reasoned order within eight weeks thereafter. It is made clear that in case any other similarly situated employee like the petitioner has been granted the benefit admissible under Rule 27(B) of the Rules under similar circumstance, then the petitioner shall also be entitled for the same benefit and the authority thereafter. It is made clear that in case any other employee has been granted the benefit admissible under the Rule 27(B) under similar circumstance, i.e., as is the case of the petitioner, then the petitioner shall also be entitled for the same benefit and the authority concerned shall issue necessary order for payment of the same within the afaresaid time.