JUDGMENT (Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay comprehensive pension based on the entire service of the petitioner worked as Conductor from 29.05.1979 to 25.07.1994 and as Helper from 28.11.1994 to 31.05.2011.) 1. The relief sought for in the present Writ Petition is to direct the respondents to pay the comprehensive pension based on the entire service rendered by him in the posts of Conductor from 29.05.1979 to 25.07.1994 and as Helper from 28.11.1994 to 31.05.2011. 2. The petitioner states that he entered into service as Conductor on 29.05.1979 and he met with an accident during the course of employment. Thus, the petitioner was discharged from the post of Conductor on 25.07.1994 on the ground of medical invalidation. Thereafter, he was appointed as Helper as a fresh entrant by proceedings dated 25.11.1994 and he was reinstated as Helper on 28.11.1994. Thereafter, the petitioner served in the Transport Corporation and retired from service on 31.05.2011. 3. It is not in dispute that the terminal and pensionary benefits due to the petitioner have already been settled by the Corporation. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is eligible for comprehensive pension, taking into consideration the services rendered by him as Conductor from 1979 to 1994. 4. The learned counsel for the respondents made a submission that the period of service was taken into consideration for the purpose of settling the terminal and pensionary benefits. However, the petitioner was discharged from the post of Conductor and thereafter appointed as fresh entrant in the post of Helper, in the proceedings dated 25.11.1994. The appointment order also categorically states that the earlier services will not be taken into account. 5. When the terms and conditions of the fresh appointment in proceedings dated 25.11.1994 stipulates that the earlier services will not be taken into consideration and admittedly on the said conditions, the petitioner joined in the post of Helper, served in the said post and retired from service, now after receiving all the benefits, he cannot turn around and file the present Writ Petition seeking comprehensive pension. 6. 6. The petitioner himself admitted in the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition that he was appointed as fresh entrant in proceedings dated 25.11.1994 and retired from service on 31.05.2011 and the present Writ Petition was filed after a lapse of 3 years from the date of his retirement. The order of appointment categorically states that the petitioner is not entitled for counting the earlier services and the date of commencement of probation has also been clearly stated. Since the petitioner has admitted the terms and conditions in the order of appointment dated 25.11.1994, he is not entitled to claim any further benefits beyond the scope of the conditions stipulated in the order of appointment. 7. This being the factum, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief as such sought for in this Writ Petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.