ORDER : Arun Bhansali, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 14/8/2001 (Annex.8), whereby, it was communicated to the Bank by the Assistant Accounts Officer that a new P.P.O. No. 1532 has been issued to the petitioner, wherein, the petitioner was entitled to monthly pension of Rs. 221/- per month and as he was being paid pension of Rs. 267/- p.m., the excess of Rs. 2530/- has been paid and, therefore, after adjusting Rs. 734/- towards I.R., a sum of Rs. 1796/- be deducted and be sent back to the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner. A further prayer has been made that petitioner is entitled to monthly pension of Rs. 763/- p.m. w.e.f. 1/1/1997 or such further increased amount in terms of Accounting Manual of Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995 ('the Scheme, 1995'). 2. The petitioner was employed as Carpenter by M/s. Metallizing Equipment Company vide appointment letter dated 9/6/1986, he was governed by Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 ('the Act') and the Scheme,1995. The petitioner left the service at the age of 52 years on 31/12/1996 after attaining the age of 52 years on 20/10/1996, where after on 28/7/1998, the respondent authorities sent a P.P.O. No. 1537 indicating the pension of Rs. 267/- per month w.e.f.1/1/1997. The petitioner sought revision of pension in terms of para 12 sub para 4(a) & (b) of the Scheme, 1995. By letter dated 14/1/2001 (Annex.6), the petitioner was informed that his pension has been increased to Rs. 325/- p.m. and where after the impugned communication (Annex.8) was issued reducing the same to Rs. 221/- p.m. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to pension of Rs. 763/- p.m. w.e.f. 1/1/1997 in terms of para 12 (4) (a) & (b) of the Scheme, 1995 and as the respondents have passed an order Annex.8 in total contravention of the said provision, the order impugned deserves to be quashed and set aside. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the pension of the petitioner has been calculated in terms of the provisions of the Scheme and same does not call for any interference. 5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 6. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the pension of the petitioner has been calculated in terms of the provisions of the Scheme and same does not call for any interference. 5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 6. The facts are in dispute that the date of birth of petitioner was 20/10/1944 and he joined the service on 6/6/1986 and he ceased to be a member of the Scheme on 31/12/1996 and, therefore, he was accorded pension w.e.f. 1/1/1997. The salary at the time of cessation of employment i.e. 31/12/1996 was Rs. 2421/- p.m. The applicable provision in the present case is para 12 of the Scheme of 1995, which insofar as relevant reads as under: "12. Monthly member's pensionable (1) A member shall be entitled to : ...... (2) In case of a new entrant the amount of monthly superannuation pension or retiring pension, as the case may be, shall be computed in accordance with the following factors, namely: Monthly member's pension = Pensionable salary x Pensionable service/70 (3) In the case of an employee who was a member of the ceased Family Pension Scheme, 1971 and who has attained the age of 48 years on 16-11-1995; Superannuation/retirement/short service pension shall be equal to the aggregate of: (a) pension as determined under sub-paragraph (2) for the period of pensionable service rendered from 16th November, 1995 or Rs. 635/- per month, whichever is more; (b) past service pension benefit shall be as given below: The past service benefit payable on completion of 589 years of age on 16-11-1995. Years of past service Salary upto Rs. 2,500 p.m. Salary more than Rs. 2,500 p.m (I) Up to 11 years 80 85 (ii) More than 11 years but up to 15 years 95 105 (iii) More than 15 years but less than 20 years 120 135 (iv) Beyond 20 years 150 170 Subject to a minimum of Rs. 800/- per month provided the past service is 24 years. If the aggregate service is less than 24 years, the pension and the benefits computed as above shall be reduced proportionately subject to a minimum of Rs. 450/- per month. 800/- per month provided the past service is 24 years. If the aggregate service is less than 24 years, the pension and the benefits computed as above shall be reduced proportionately subject to a minimum of Rs. 450/- per month. (c) On completion of the age of 58 years after 16-11-1995, the benefit under column (2) or column (3) above, as the case may be, shall be multiplied by the factor given in Table B corresponding to the period between 16-11-1995/and/date of attainment of age 58 to arrive at past service pension payable; 4. In the case of an employee who was a member of the ceased Family Pension Scheme, 1971 and has attained the age of 48 years, but less than 53 years on 16th November, 1995, the superannuation/retirement pension shall be equal to the aggregate of: (a) pension as determined under sub-paragraph (2) for the period of service rendered from 16th November, 1995 or Rs. 438/- per month, whichever is more. (b) past service benefits as provided in sub-paragraph (3) subject to a minimum of Rs. 600/- per month provided the past service is 24 years. Provided further that if it is less than 24 years the pension payable and the past service benefits taken together shall be proportionately less subject to the minimum of Rs. 325/- per month. 5. ....... 6. ...... 7. A member, if he so desires, may be allowed to draw a monthly reduced pension from a date earlier than 58 years of age, but earlier than 50 years of age. In such cases, that amount of pension shall be reduced at the rate of three per cent for every year, the age falls short of 58 years." 7. As per the above Scheme and as per the detailed bifurcation indicated by the respondent in the reply, the petitioner is entitled to minimum pension of Rs. 265/- p.m., however, the same was reduced in terms of para 12(7) of the Scheme, 1995 on account of cessation of petitioner's employment at the age of 52 years to Rs. 221/- p.m. The detailed calculations indicated by the respondent in its reply has been disputed either during the course of submissions and/or by filing any rejoinder to the said reply. 8. 221/- p.m. The detailed calculations indicated by the respondent in its reply has been disputed either during the course of submissions and/or by filing any rejoinder to the said reply. 8. In view thereof, the pension arrived at by the respondent in terms of Scheme of 1995, which has since been revised on account of subsequent developments like enhancement of minimum pension as well as payment on account of revaluation of funds, the order impugned does call for any interference. 9. Consequently, there is no substance in the writ petition and the same is, therefore, dismissed.