JUDGMENT : P.P. Bhatt, J. 1. The petitioner is a Senior Citizen, at present aged about 87 years. By way of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, he has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ/order directing the respondents to give effect of the Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991, and thereby, treat the previous services rendered by him under the Postal Department of Government of India for a period of about 15 years as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits. It is also prayed that it may be declared that the Government Resolution dated 2nd January 1997, at Annexure-M has only prospective effect and it cannot be applied retrospectively. The petitioner has further prayed that the respondents may be directed to revise the pension and other pensionary benefits after treating the services rendered under Postal Department as qualifying services. 2. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are as under:- The petitioner has served under the Postal Department, Government of India, for 15 years i.e. from 20th May 1951 to 14th of June 1966. Thereafter, he had tendered resignation and joined C.U. Shah Arts College as a Lecturer from 15.06.1966, and retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 14.10.1990. The petitioner made a representation on 03.03.1989, addressed to the Secretary, Postal Department, New Delhi, for issuing necessary orders for certifying and inclusion of his service under Central Government for the purpose of pension. The same was forwarded to the Director General, Postal Department by respondent No. 1 vide its letter dated 23.10.1989. The petitioner is claiming the benefits of Government Resolution dated 14.12.1989, which allows counting of past service for the purpose of pension of an employee of Central Government and Public Sector Undertakings on their absorption in the State Government. He is also claiming the benefit of qualifying service in view of Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991, which clearly provides that past service rendered under Government of India shall be treated as qualifying service for the purpose of pension. The petitioner has served for about 24 years under the State, and prior to that, 15 years under the Central Government. The petitioner has served for about 24 years under the State, and prior to that, 15 years under the Central Government. If the period of 15 years service rendered under Government of India will be treated as qualifying service, the petitioner can get full pension and that is why, he made a representation to provide benefits of past service rendered under Central Government as qualifying service for the purpose of pension in light of Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991. 3. The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner after his retirement from the services in the year 1990 requested the authorities concerned to treat his past services of 15 years rendered in the Central Government, Postal Department as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefit. It is submitted that in light of the Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991, the petitioner is eligible and entitled to get the benefit of past services as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefit. However, the Government has not treated the said period as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefit. It is submitted that the Government Resolution dated 2.1.1997 has no bearing on the facts of the present case because the said resolution will have prospective effect. The case of the petitioner deserves consideration in light of Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991. It is also submitted that the Education Department of Government of Gujarat in its communication dated 23rd October 1989 addressed to Director General Postal Department, New Delhi, specifically observed that if 15 years of services rendered by the petitioner in Central Government will be counted for the purpose of pension, he will be able to get full pensionary benefits, and the State Government has, therefore, considered his case sympathetically, and decided to count the said services of 15 years for pension purpose, provided that the Government of India agrees to bear the proportionate pensionary liability. The State Government vide its communication dated 23rd October 1989 requested the Director General, Postal Department, New Delhi, that the case of the petitioner may be considered sympathetically and the decision, thereof shall be communicated at the earliest. The State Government vide its communication dated 23rd October 1989 requested the Director General, Postal Department, New Delhi, that the case of the petitioner may be considered sympathetically and the decision, thereof shall be communicated at the earliest. It is submitted that subsequent thereto, the Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991 was issued by the Government of Gujarat, and by virtue of said Resolution, it has been decided to treat the entire past service rendered under Central Government as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits. It is submitted that this Resolution was passed in concurrence of the Finance Department. However, till date, the case of the petitioner is not considered by the respondent for giving benefit of past service of 15 years as qualifying service for pensionary benefits, and thereby the petitioner is deprived of getting full pension. It is submitted that petitioner is aged about 87 years, and he is awaiting for justice in light of Government Policy decision dated 30th April 1991. The learned advocate for the petitioner while referring judgment delivered in case of Snehlattaben Hemiltan Desai versus State of Gujarat & Others given in Special Civil Application No. 17007 of 2012 also submits that in similar facts and circumstances, this Court (Coram : Paresh Upadhyay, J.) allowed the petition and directed the respondents to fix the pay and pay the arrears of salary and pension. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State, while opposing the present petition, submits that the Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991 has been withdrawn subsequently by the respondent-State Government by passing another Resolution dated 2.1.1997, and, therefore, there is no question of giving any benefit under Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991 in the case of petitioner. 5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that in view of Rule 33 of Gujarat Civil Services (Pension Rules) 2002, the Government employee, who is reappointed to Government service after resignation on his own accord, shall not be entitled to count services rendered by him prior to the date of resignation for his qualifying service, and therefore, since the petitioner has tendered resignation dated 13.06.1966, and it was accepted by the Postal Department, Central Government, there is no question of counting the services rendered under Central Government as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits. 6. 6. Regard being had to the above submissions and looking to the facts and circumstances of the present case, it appears that the petitioner has rendered services under the Central Government, Postal Department, New Delhi as Postal Assistant for 15 years from 20th May 1951 to 14th June 1966. Thereafter, the petitioner has tendered resignation and joined C.U. Shah Arts College from 15.06.1966 to 14.10.1990. When he was retired on attaining the age of superannuation, it appears that the petitioner made a representation for treating his past services rendered under Central Government as qualifying service in light of Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991, which clearly provides that the past services rendered under Central Government shall be treated as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits. On perusal of the Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991, it becomes clear that the said Resolution was issued by the Government of Gujarat in concurrence of the Finance Department and the case of the petitioner is pending since 1990-91 for consideration in light of Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991, but the respondent-State Government has neither taken any decision nor extended the benefit under the said Resolution by treating past 15 years services as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefit. It also appears that the Education Department, Government of Gujarat, by its Communication dated 23rd October 1989 addressed to Director General Postal Department, New Delhi has observed as under:- "........ Since Shri K.A. Shah has put in 15 years of services in the Central Govt. and if it is counted for the pension purpose then only, he will be able to get full pensionary benefits. The State Govt. has therefore considered his case sympathetically and decided to count the said services of 15 years for pension purpose, provided the Govt. of India agrees to bear proportionate pensionary liability. It is therefore, requested that his case may be considered sympathetically and the decision thereof may be communicated at an earliest." 7. After the aforesaid communication, the Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991 came into existence, and therefore, the case of the petitioner requires consideration in light of aforesaid policy decision. The Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991 was effective till the other Resolution dated 02.01.1997 passed by the respondent-State Government came into existence. After the aforesaid communication, the Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991 came into existence, and therefore, the case of the petitioner requires consideration in light of aforesaid policy decision. The Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991 was effective till the other Resolution dated 02.01.1997 passed by the respondent-State Government came into existence. By Government Resolution dated 02.01.1997, the previous Resolution dated 30th April 1991 was cancelled, but the said resolution shall have prospective effect. So far as facts of the present case are concerned, the State Government Resolution shall have no bearing and the case of the petitioner deserves consideration in light of previous Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991, and the communication made by the Government of Gujarat dated 23rd October 1989. The State Government was also of the opinion that the case of the petitioner is required to be considered by taking a sympathetic view, and accordingly, it has been forwarded to the Director General, Postal Department, Government of India. But thereafter, Government of Gujarat has introduced a policy decision dated 30th April 1991 and decided to treat the past service rendered under Government of India as qualifying service for the pensionary purpose. If the service is rendered by the petitioner under Central Government will be treated as qualifying service for the pension purpose, the petitioner will be able to get full pensionary benefits. 8. This Court is, therefore, of the view that Rule 33 cited by the Learned Assistant Government Pleader shall have no bearing qua the facts of the present case. Rule 33 has also an exception which clearly provides that if the Government employee had good reasons for resigning from service in the first instance or he was compelled by reasons beyond his control, in such a case, the provision made under Rule 33 will not be applicable. In the instant case initially the petitioner was selected and appointed in Central Services and accordingly he served with the Postal department from 20.05.1951 to 14.06.1966 (total 15 years on permanent full time service). He resigned from Postal department and his resignation was accepted with immediate effect on 14.06.1966. The very next date i.e. 15.06.1966 the petitioner joined C.U. Shah Arts College as lecturer in Economics. The said college is affiliated to Gujarat University and receiving grant-in-aid from government. He served till the age of superannuation and retired from services on 14.10.1990. He resigned from Postal department and his resignation was accepted with immediate effect on 14.06.1966. The very next date i.e. 15.06.1966 the petitioner joined C.U. Shah Arts College as lecturer in Economics. The said college is affiliated to Gujarat University and receiving grant-in-aid from government. He served till the age of superannuation and retired from services on 14.10.1990. The Government of Gujarat introduced the pension scheme for teaching and non-teaching staff of the Universities and affiliated non-Government aided colleges by Government Resolution dated 26.09.1989 with effect from 01.04.1982 on the same basis as that of the Government employees with the same terms and conditions. The Government of Gujarat further issued a Government Resolution dated 14.12.1989 allowing the counting of service under the Government of India and autonomous bodies on their absorption to Government of Gujarat/autonomous bodies and vice versa to all those employees who were in service on 07.02.1986. Thereafter the Government of Gujarat issued a further Government Resolution dated 30.04.1991 extending the benefits of Government Resolution dated 14.12.1989 to the teaching and non-teaching staff of the Universities and colleges with effect from 01.04.1982 as admitted by the respondents in their affidavit-in-reply. The petitioner resigned from Central services as he got an opportunity to serve in the home State in a better position related to field of education. Therefore, his case falls within the exception made in Rule-33 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension Rules) 2002. 9. Moreover, the Government of Gujarat by its Resolution dated 30th April 1991 has introduced a policy decision, whereby past services rendered on the establishment of Central Government shall be treated as qualifying service for the purpose of pension. It also appears that in similar situation this Court (Coram: Paresh Upadhyay, J.) delivered judgment in case of Snehlattben Hemiltan Desai versus State of Gujarat & others in Special Civil Application No. 17007 of 2012. The petition was allowed and respondents were directed to give benefit revised pay and pension by treating earlier service rendered in Government of India School as qualifying service for the purpose of pension. The petition was allowed and respondents were directed to give benefit revised pay and pension by treating earlier service rendered in Government of India School as qualifying service for the purpose of pension. The petitioner is claiming benefit under the aforesaid resolution, and therefore, the respondent-State authorities are directed to extend the benefit of past service of 15 years rendered by the petitioner under the Central Government as qualifying service in light of Government Resolution dated 30th April 1991, and accordingly the respondents shall revise the pension and pay the difference within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the order. 10. The present petition is allowed accordingly. Rule is made absolute. Directed service is permitted. Petition Allowed