JUDGMENT : (S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.) The intra-Court appeal on hand has been instituted against the order dated 23.05.2024 passed in W.P.No.18088 of 2022. The writ petitioner is the appellant before this Court. 2. Mr.V.S.S.Krishna appearing in person would submit he was engaged as Financial Services Executive under the LIC of India (Financial Services Executives) Scheme, 2007. He was subsequently terminated. The appellant states that commission due to him has not been paid with reference to 4626 policies mobilized by him and the benefits are realized by the respondent-Life Insurance Corporation of India. 3. The learned single Judge rejected the writ petition, which resulted in filing of the writ appeal. 4. Admittedly, the appellant was engaged as Financial Services Executive under the LIC of India (Financial Services Executives) Scheme, 2007. The service conditions and remuneration are covered under the scheme. The nature of engagement has been stated in clause 3. Accordingly, the engagement shall be purely on contractual basis initially for a period of three years. The terms and conditions of engagement will be governed by the LIC of India (Financial Services Executives) Scheme, 2007. Mode of selection is also contemplated under clause 6. Training is provided by LIC. Clause 17 speaks about remuneration. The financial services executives on successful completion of training shall be paid fixed remuneration every month as under:- Rs. 1st Yr 2nd Yr 3rd Yr 4th Yr 5th Yr 6th Yr Basic Pay 4500 5000 5500 6000 7000 7500 House Rent Allowance 2500 3000 3200 3200 3200 3500 Medical 1500 1500 1800 1800 2000 2200 Conveyance 1000 1200 1500 2500 3000 3500 Mobile Charges 500 600 700 1000 1500 2200 Total 10000 11300 12700 14500 16700 18900 Clause 18 denotes incentives. Accordingly, the amount of cash incentive shall be calculated as per table available under the scheme on the eligible premium brought in excess of the minimum eligible premium for the relevant year. 5. The appellant would submit that he has mobilized 4626 policies. However, he received incentives for 2925 policies. That apart, the appellant claims commission for the said policies. 6. The writ Court found that the appellant is not eligible to claim commission, as the conditions of engagement and fixed remuneration have been contemplated under the scheme. Thus the appellant is not entitled to seek commission from the LIC management. However, he received incentives for 2925 policies. That apart, the appellant claims commission for the said policies. 6. The writ Court found that the appellant is not eligible to claim commission, as the conditions of engagement and fixed remuneration have been contemplated under the scheme. Thus the appellant is not entitled to seek commission from the LIC management. The appellant admits that he was informed by LIC that the total number of policies completed during his tenure as FSE was 2925, which has already been communicated and incentives were also paid for such completed policies. 7. This Court is of the considered opinion that the claim of the appellant to pay commission would not arise at all, since the scheme itself contemplates fixed remuneration and incentive under clauses 17 & 18 of the scheme and beyond the said modes of remuneration agreed between the parties, the appellant is not entitled to claim any further commission. 8. The appellant would submit that he has obtained licence from the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority. Therefore, he is entitled for commission in respect of the policies admitted through him. 9. The scheme itself contemplates that licence from Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority is a pre-condition for engagement as Financial Services Executive. Therefore, based on the said licence, the appellant cannot claim separate commission over and above the remuneration and incentive contemplated under the scheme. The nature of engagement is contractual and the appellant is bound by the terms and conditions of the contract. The appellant admittedly received remuneration on monthly basis and incentives for the completed policies. That being so, we do not find any infirmity in respect of the writ order. 10. The appellant is at liberty to give details regarding the completed policies to the respondents and the respondents shall examine whether the appellant is further eligible for any incentive under the scheme. With the above observation, the writ appeal stands disposed of. No costs.