Ghanshyam Dass Relhan vs State Of Haryana & Ors

The Supreme Court held that the petitioner, who resigned from his post to join a bank, was not entitled to pension under Rule 5.2(a) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules due to insufficient qualifying service of 30 years. The Court emphasized that the interpretation of pension rules should be liberal, particularly in the context of social security post-retirement. The Court found that the High Court erred in applying Rule 4.19(a) regarding forfeiture of past service, as the conditions for such forfeiture were not met in the petitioner's case.