Judgment : Originally, this writ petition is instituted by four individuals. But however, of them, the first petitioner Sri G. Raja Reddy died and his legal representatives are thus brought on record as 5th and 6th petitioners. The petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to extend the pensionary benefits on par with similarly placed persons who were recruited under “Half a Million Job Programme” and who have been accorded the benefit of computing the training period spent by them beyond the initial nine months period of training, as qualifying service. The State Government with a view to augment the employment opportunities, has set apart a sum of Rs.2.50 crores for providing jobs to half a million people in various departments other than Industries Department. It is worthy to be noticed that, this was pursued by the State as a policy measure and hence, orders were passed through G.O.Ms.No.84 (Employment and Social Welfare Department) dated 10.07.1973 wherein, detailed instructions were issued for guidance and compliance by various departments. The schemes required to be undertaken under the Half a Million Job Programme are staff schemes, training programmes and self-employment schemes. All the beneficiaries under the first two categories, i.e. staff schemes and training programmes will be stipendiaries on scales indicated at annexure 2 of the said G.O. Most importantly, this policy decision announced through the Chief Secretary to the Government clearly set out that, it is an essential requirement that there should be provision for absorption-in regular appointments next year -of the stipendiaries now appointed under the plan or non-plan schemes and the departments should observe this requirement meticulously and ensure that, such provision is available. It was also further required to ensure that the candidates under the stipendiary scheme shall fulfill all the rules and qualifications for regular appointment so that their absorption against regular posts next year would not pose any problems or need any relaxation. Under this scheme, several candidates came to be appointed in the service of the former Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board. It is constituted in accordance with the provisions of Sections 5 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 for the State of Andhra Pradesh. The petitioners 1 to 4 are one such who came to be appointed under the Half a Million Job Programme initially and later on absorbed after expiry of the training period in the service of the APSEB. It is constituted in accordance with the provisions of Sections 5 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 for the State of Andhra Pradesh. The petitioners 1 to 4 are one such who came to be appointed under the Half a Million Job Programme initially and later on absorbed after expiry of the training period in the service of the APSEB. As part of electricity reforms, the composite APSEB has been divided into Generation Corporation of Andhra Pradesh (APGENCO) and Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh (APTRANSCO). Some of the graduate engineers and diploma holders selected for training under Half a Million Jobs Programme, initially on stipendiary basis and later on absorbed into regular service, represented that, the training period undergone by the graduate engineers/diploma holders beyond initial 9 months period, may be reckoned as qualifying service for purpose of computation of pensionary benefits as some of them have not put in the requisite number of years of qualifying service to earn full pension. Hence, the Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Limited has taken a policy decision and announced the same through its T.O.O. (Addl. Secy-Per) Ms.No.69 dated 25.06.2004 ordering that, such of the employees who fall short of service to earn full pension shall make individual representations to APTRANSCO so that, the balance length of training period undergone by them after the initial training period of 9 months can be added and computed for pensionary benefits purpose. Accordingly, several employees who have retired from service after 25.06.2004 derived a small extent of benefit of having the period of training undergone by them beyond the initial 9 months period, under Half a Million Job Programme, added to the service rendered by them after absorption. Then the issue has cropped up with regard to the consideration of cases of such persons who were also recruited under Half a Million Job Programme but retired prior to 25.06.2004, the date on which orders in T.O.O. (Addl. Secy-Per)Ms.No.69 dated 25.06.2004 are issued by the APTRANSCO. Seeing merit in the request of those who have retired prior to 25.06.2004 for treating the rest of the training period beyond the initial 9 months for qualifying service, the APTRANSCO issued orders through T.O.O. (Addl. Secy-Per) Ms. No. 83 dated 31.05.2010 extending to them also the benefit of the orders passed earlier in T.O.O. (Addl. Secy-Per) Ms.No.69 dated 25.06.2004 subject to the conditions specified therein. Secy-Per) Ms. No. 83 dated 31.05.2010 extending to them also the benefit of the orders passed earlier in T.O.O. (Addl. Secy-Per) Ms.No.69 dated 25.06.2004 subject to the conditions specified therein. No difference, on retirement gratuity and encashment of Earned Leave, shall be allowed to the pensioners on the basis of the revised computation. However, the difference in computation value of pension shall be allowed. But, the most important condition stipulated is that, the monetary benefit shall be given with effect from 01.04.2010 only. In other words, the payment of arrears of pension between 25.6.2004 upto 31.3.2010 is denied to them. In this writ petition, the validity of this condition of confining the monetary benefit w.e.f. 01.04.2010 has fallen for challenge. Heard Sri M. Narasimloo, and Sri P. Lakshma Reddy, learned standing counsel for the respondents. Fortunately, the facts are not at all in dispute. The Transmission Corporation (TRANSCO) has taken a policy decision and announced the same through their TOO (Addl Secretary) Ms No. 69, dated 25.6.2004, conceding the request of some of the Graduate Engineers and Diploma holders selected for undergoing training under Half a Million Jobs programme on stipendary basis and did not put in the requisite length of service to fetch them full pension, to treat the period of training undergone by them beyond the initial nine months period as qualifying service for computation of pensionary benefits. These orders were not rendered applicable to the cases of voluntary retirement. From this policy decision, it has emerged that those who have been initially selected for undergoing training under the Half a Million Job programme have been extended the benefit of computing that portion of the training period in excess of the initial nine months towards qualifying service for computation of pensionary benefits, in case they could not earn full pension. Obviously, this was in consonance with the spirit under which the State Government conceived this project and issued orders through their GO Ms No. 84, Employment and Social Welfare Department, on 10.7.1973. The effect of this policy decision taken by the TRANSCO is that the remaining period beyond the initial nine months of training is to be computed towards qualifying service for computation of pensionary benefits. The effect of this policy decision taken by the TRANSCO is that the remaining period beyond the initial nine months of training is to be computed towards qualifying service for computation of pensionary benefits. Since all orders are construed to be prospective unless expressly stated to be so or by implication, such of those employees who have retired after 25.6.2004 had derived the benefit of adding to the qualifying service the additional period rendered by them beyond the initial nine months training period. There is no difficulty in giving effect to this order. But, however, some other employees who were similarly placed, in the sense that they were also recruited pursuant to the policy decision announced by the State Government contained in G.O.Ms No. 84, Employment and Social Welfare Department, dated 10.7.1973 under Half a Million Jobs programme and have retired from service of TRANSCO prior to 25.6.2004, the date on which TOO Ms No. 69 was issued, also could not earn full pension. Since they have already retired, their pensionary benefits have also been settled, and hence they made a request to TRANSCO to extend the same benefit to them also so that they will be entitled to reckon the additional length of period spent by them beyond the period of nine months training period after they were recruited as stipendaries under the Half a Million Job programme towards qualifying service. It is an admitted position that the quantum of pensionary benefits will vary upwardly depending upon their qualifying length of service put in by the individual. More the length of such qualifying service put in till one reaches the ceiling prescribed for the said purpose, a right to earn higher quantum of pensionary benefits would be assured. Therefore, addition of the balance period beyond 1st nine months of training period would fetch them upward revision of pensionary benefits by few hundred rupees. Therefore, they also sought for parity of treatment with those who are recruited under the Half a Million Jobs programme and retired after 25.6.2004. Finding no difference between those who have retired prior to 25.6.2004 and those who are likely to retire after 25.6.2004, the Corporation has passed orders through TOO (Addl. Secy-Per) Ms No.83, dated 31.5.2010, the parity of treatment in principle is restored. But, however, in the said orders, it is stated that the monetary benefit shall be given with effect from 1.4.2010. Secy-Per) Ms No.83, dated 31.5.2010, the parity of treatment in principle is restored. But, however, in the said orders, it is stated that the monetary benefit shall be given with effect from 1.4.2010. This is what has been objected to in this writ petition. Since all similarly placed persons were granted the benefits from 25.6.2004 onwards, the petitioners solicit that the monetary benefits should also be extended to them with effect from 25.6.2004. In other words, they are staking a claim for the benefits with effect from 25.6.2004 and payment of arrears on that score. The respondents could not make out any distinction or difference in between these two segements, for the later segment to be granted monetary benefit with effect from 1.4.2010, except asserting that the financial year 2010-11 commences on 1.4.2010 and it is during this financial year that the decision per se has been taken by the corporation. Quantum of pensionary benefits payable will be determined on the basis of the length of qualifying service put in by each employee subject of course to the ceiling that might be fixed thereon such as 33 years of qualifying service. Any service rendered beyond the said 33 years will not fetch any additional monetary benefit to the retired employees as they get full admissible pension. Therefore, fixation of pensionary benefits is directly proportional and intertwined inseparably with the length of qualifying service one puts in. When once the corporation had taken a decision to add a part of the training period undertaken by the stipendaries under a Half a Million Job programme towards qualifying service, the pensionary benefits will have to be worked out duly adding and reckoning the said additional period also to the qualifying service computed and reckoned earlier. Illustratively put, if an employee, who has retired prior to 25.6.2004, had a qualifying service of 22 years only but, however, by reckoning the period of training undergone by him under a Half a Million Jobs programme beyond the initial nine months period is added, the qualifying service in the case of such an employee will jump to 24 years. If 24 years is taken into account for reckoning the pensionary benefit, the same would help him secure pension at a higher quantum. Once that is done, the benefit of actual payment must also necessarily be from the time the original pensionary benefits have been settled and paid. If 24 years is taken into account for reckoning the pensionary benefit, the same would help him secure pension at a higher quantum. Once that is done, the benefit of actual payment must also necessarily be from the time the original pensionary benefits have been settled and paid. For purposes of payment of the pensionary benefits, an artificial date should not have been fixed. I am conscious that whenever pensionary benefits are revised upwardly, the benefit of payment of arrears would be conferred with effect from a common date prescribed, such as 1st January, 1st July or 1st April, as the case may be. But, in the instant case, it is not a case of mere revision of the admissible pensionary benefits. The revision now ordered is with regard to qualifying length of service. Once the qualifying length of service is revised upwardly, the eligibility to receive pensionary benefits on the strength and basis of the same starts flowing from the very initial date for receiving the pensionary benefits. Illustratively put, let us suppose that for having rendered 28 years of qualifying service, a monthly pension of Rs.5,000/-is paid and to that qualifying service, 2 more years is added making it 30 years, the pensionary benefits jump to Rs.5,500/-. In such cases, no other artificial date could be chosen or prescribed for payment of such enhanced pension. The same will have to be paid from the date it was decided to add to or revise the qualifying length of service. Therefore, the emphasis is relatable to the date the decision was taken for revising the length of qualifying service. The decision to add having been taken, initially on 25.6.2004, the resultant benefit must be accorded from that date. I therefore do not find any valid basis or justification for the respondents to declare that the monetary benefits will be allowed with effect from 1.4.2010 for those who are covered by policy measure taken through TOO Ms No. 83, dated 31.5.2010. The nexus between the object and the attempted classification is completely missing. All those who were initially picked up under Half a Million Jobs fair and who could not put in full length of service, after absorption into regular service and consequently could not earn full pension, do form into a homogenous group incapable of being segregated as pre and post 25.06.2004 retirees. All those who were initially picked up under Half a Million Jobs fair and who could not put in full length of service, after absorption into regular service and consequently could not earn full pension, do form into a homogenous group incapable of being segregated as pre and post 25.06.2004 retirees. Accordingly, I hold that the monetary benefits have to flow from 25.6.2004, the initial date on which TOO Ms No. 69 was announced. I am not in a position to appreciate the contention canvassed by Sri S.Laxma Reddy, learned Standing Counsel that each DISCOM is independently entitled to take a view in the matter. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointedly drawn my attention to the orders passed by the Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited, Visakhapatnam and the Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Tirupati, who have passed orders extending revised pensionary benefits in the case of Sri R.Venkatram Reddy, the Divisional Engineer/Elecl, who retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2002 AN. In his case, the orders are passed through their Memo No. CGM(A)/DS(A)/AS(A)/PO-F2/643/2007, dated 30.5.2007 granting him the monetary benefit of the revised pensionary benefits with effect from 25.6.2004 as Sri R.Venkata Ram Reddy, is one such candidate who was recruited under the Half Million Job Scheme. Similarly, in the case of Sri A.Sambasiva Rao, Divisional Engineer, who retired on 30.6.2000, the Southern Power Distribution Company Limited passed similar orders through their Memo No. CMD/CGM(HRD)/DS/AS(1)/ PO/JPO No. 2400/04, dated 17.10.2004 according him the monetary benefit with effect from 25.6.2004. Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited has also passed similar orders vide orders dated 30.3.2005 in respect of Sri P.Nageswara Rao, Divisional Engineer/ Operation/ Jaggaiahpeta on 31.8.2003. Since the pensionary benefits are liable to be paid to all pensioners or in case of their unfortunate death to their surviving legal heirs, all those people who are entitled for reckoning the benefit of length of service put in by them during the training period beyond the initial nine months spent under the Half a Million Jobs scheme should be extended this benefit. For securing additionally few hundreds of rupees, all the individual pensioners need not be driven to an expensive and time consuming litigation, causing in the process, unnecessary strain on the dismal infrastructure of the courts. For securing additionally few hundreds of rupees, all the individual pensioners need not be driven to an expensive and time consuming litigation, causing in the process, unnecessary strain on the dismal infrastructure of the courts. Therefore, the respondents are directed to pay the benefits to all eligible persons pursuant to this judgment irrespective of the fact whether they approached this court or some other court or not. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition stands allowed. But, however, without costs.