JUDGMENT : Vivek Singh Thakur, J. Petitioners have approached this Court seeking direction to the respondents to extend them benefits of extension of service in furtherance to the Notifications dated 24.09.2015 and 30.11.2015 (Annexure P-5 & P-6), whereby, State and National Awardee Teachers have been given benefits of extension of one/two years of service, in lieu of cash award for receiving State/National Awards. 2. Petitioner No.1 was awarded State and National Award on 05.09.2001 and 05.09.2008. Petitioner No.2 was awarded State and National Award on 05.09.2004 and 05.09.2007. At that time State and National Awardee was entitled for one and two year(s) extension of service after attaining age of superannuation. 3. Before retirement of petitioners, vide notification dated 15.09.2003 (Annexure P-4), it was notified that State Awardee teachers will be given a cash award of Rs.25,000/- and the National Awardee teachers will be given a cash award of Rs.50,000/-, in lieu of extension of 1 year and 2 year of service which was being given to such awardees earlier, on attaining the age of superannuation and this decision was made effective from the date of issue of the Notification. 4. Undisputedly, before attaining age of superannuation by the petitioners, Rs.50,000/- each was paid to them through Bank Draft dated 03.09.2009 and 02.09.2008 respectively. Petitioner No.1 retired on 31.10.2009, whereas, petitioner No.2 retired on 31.05.2010. 5. Vide Notification dated 24.09.2015 (Annexure P-5), Policy of the State was again changed and State/National Awardees were granted 1 year/2 year extension of service from the date of Notification. Vide Notification dated 30.11.2015, it was notified that the teachers, who had received cash award in lieu of receiving State/National awards they would also have option to get 1/2 years extension of service, as the case may be, being State/National Awardees, subject to the condition that the cash award received by such teachers would be deducted from the salary in 12 equal installments. 6. Petitioners are claiming benefit of extension of service on the basis of aforesaid Notifications issued in the year 2015, claiming that vide Notification dated 30.11.2015, right to petitioners has accrued for receiving benefit of 1 year/2 year of extension of service by refunding cash award. 7. 6. Petitioners are claiming benefit of extension of service on the basis of aforesaid Notifications issued in the year 2015, claiming that vide Notification dated 30.11.2015, right to petitioners has accrued for receiving benefit of 1 year/2 year of extension of service by refunding cash award. 7. Perusal of Notification dated 24.09.2015, clearly depicts that benefit of extension was extended w.e.f. 24.09.2015 and from condition notified in Notification dated 30.11.2015, it is also evident that this policy decision was applicable to the teachers, who were already in service at the time of issuance of notification as cash award received by such teachers was to be deducted from their salary in 12 equal installments and that would have been possible only in case concerned teacher was in service at the time of issuance of the notification. 8. Extension is granted to an employee who is in service. No extension can be after retirement. After retirement there can only be re-employment. Notification/Policy of respondent-State provides grant of extension but not re-employment. Therefore, claim of the petitioner is not sustainable. 9. There is another aspect in the present case. At the time of granting award to the petitioners, the policy in vogue was to pay cash award which remained in force till 2015 and petitioners had retired in the year 2009 and 2010, i.e. before change in the policy whereby benefit of extension of service was re-introduced to the State/National awardees and, therefore, this benefit is not available to the petitioners and thus, present petition is misconceived. 10. Petitioners are also placing reliance on a news item, dated 5.10.2018, published in Amar Ujala (Annexure P-7), wherein, it was published that already retired State/National Awardees teachers may also submit their application(s) for extension of service. 11. The news item is not a Notification of the State Government, but is a gist of the Policy of the State as understood by the Press Reporter or News Composer Editor on the desk of the newspaper and no right flows from such news item to anybody, including the petitioner. 12. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I do not find any merit in the present petition and the petition is dismissed accordingly. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of.