Judgment :- K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J. The petitioner was a member of the Public Service Commission. He served the Commission for six years and he vacated the office. Later the pension of the members of PSC was revised at the request of the Chairman and members as per Ext. P1. Thereupon one is entitled to get pension of Rs. 250/- per completed year of service this was later revised as Rs. 350/- as per Ext. P2, It was made clear in bath the Government Orders that go D.A.will be granted to pensioners. The maximumj pension was Rs. 1500/- which was revised to Rs. 2100/- as per Ext. P2. The petitioner is aggrieved by Exts. P1 and P2 in so far as the said orders deny payment of DA. The petitioner submits that this is discriminatory as compared by Ext. P12 notification to the extent it provides for payment of gratuity to the Chairman and members. 2. Payment of DA and payment of gratuits are different things. Merely because gratuity is made payable in terms of Ext. P12. that does not ipso facto entitle him to claim the benefit of DA. Therefore contention does not hold gnod. Petitioner submits that Exts. P1 and P2 are offending proviso Article 318 of the Constitution of India. The said proviso reads as follows: Provided that the conditions of service of a member of a Public Service Commission shall not be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment. Article 318 of the Constitution provides for conditions of service of members of Public Service Commission. This is in respect of a member who continues to be so. Therefore that has no application to the petitioner who has retired. Even if it is said to have any application. No disadvantageous variation has been ordered as per Exts. P1 and P2. In the matter of payment of pension, the petitioner is not deprived of anything. Therefore Exts. P1 and P2 is in no way prejudicial to the petitioner. 3. The further contention raised by the petitioner is that Exts. P1 and P2 is violative of Ruls 4 of the Kerala Public Service Commission (Composition and Conditions of Service of Members and Staff) Regulations 1957. Therefore Exts. P1 and P2 is in no way prejudicial to the petitioner. 3. The further contention raised by the petitioner is that Exts. P1 and P2 is violative of Ruls 4 of the Kerala Public Service Commission (Composition and Conditions of Service of Members and Staff) Regulations 1957. The said rule reads as follows: There shall be paid to the Chairman a salary at the rate of five thousand two husband and eighty-five rupees per mensem and to other members at the rate of four thousand seven hundred and eighty-five rupees per mensem. The Chairman and other members shall also be paid Dearness Allowance and City Compensatory Allowance at the rates admissible to the officers of the State Government drawing equivalent pay. 4. This is a provision applicable to those serving as Chairman and members. They will be paid D.A. Merely because those who serve the office are paid D.A. It cannot be claimed that D.A. shall be paid to those who had vacated the office. Therefore Exits P1 and P2 do not offend Regulation 4 as contended by the petitioner. 5. Apart from that there is another hurdle also to be crossed by the petitioner. This Original Petition was filed in the year 1998. Ext. P1, one among the impugned order was passed in the year 1988 and another Ext. P2 was passed in the year 1994. The petitioner is guilty of latches too. The Original Petition fails. It is dismissed.