The petitioner has come in revision against concurrent finding of two Fora below. The Consumer Forum had given directions to the present petitioner to refix the pension of the complainant as per Rule 12(4) read with Rule 10(2) of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 from the date of retirement and balance pension amount be paid to him within two months of the receipt of the order. Besides this, Rs. 1,000/- was awarded as cost of proceedings. This order was challenged by the present petitioner before the State Commission and the State Commission confirmed the order of the District Forum. The matter was finally heard at the admission stage. Counsel for the parties were heard. Counsel for the Petitioner/OP submitted before me that the pension of the complainant is required to be refixed in terms of Rule 12(3)(b) of Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 and that the complainant is not entitled to weightage of two years since he had not completed 20 years of pensionable service after 16.11.1995. It was submitted that the complainant did not make any contribution prior to 1995; that there is difference in pensionable service and eligible service and actual eligible service is relevant for fixation of pension. According to him, 20 years will have to be calculated from 1995 in order to give two years weightage, but the complainant had not completed the said period and in this connection, reliance is placed in paragraphs 6.2.13 of the Manual of Accounting Procedure. He also referred to paragraphs 6.2.14, which deals with eligible service. However, it was not disputed that if the complainant is entitled to 2 years weightage then the pension would be Rs.1529/-. According to the Counsel for the OP, the pension comes to Rs.1125/- per month and not Rs.1529/-, as claimed by the complainant. On the other hand, Counsel for the complainant has submitted that the pension of the complainant is required to be fixed as per Rule 12(4)(a) red with Rule 10(2) of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 and the complainant is entitled to weightage of two years. According to him, the pension of the complainant is required to be fixed at Rs.1529/- per month. Ld. Counsel for the complainant further submitted that the complainant was paying contribution even earlier under Family Pension Scheme, 1971 and that the findings of the Fora below do not call for interference. The facts are not in dispute. The complainant was member of the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 and he opted for employees pension scheme, 1995. He rendered past service of 24 years prior to 15.11.1995 and rendered further service of 8 years after Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 was introduced. He retired from service on 14.1.2004 on attaining superannuation of 58 years. The relevant provisions of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 have been taken into consideration by Fora below. The relevant provisions which have to be taken into account for deciding the controversy are: “Rule 2(ii) "actual service" means the aggregate of periods of service rendered from the 16th November, 1995 or from the date of joining any establishment whichever is later to the date of exit from the employment of the establishment covered under the Act; (vi) "Existing Member" means an existing employee who is a member of the Employees’ Family Pension Scheme, 1971"; (xii) "past service" means the period of service rendered by an existing member from the date of joining Employees’ Family Pension Fund till the 15th November, 1995; (xv) "pensionable service" means the service rendered by the member for which contributions have been [received or are receivable]. 6. Membership of the Employees’ Pension Scheme - Subject to sub-paragraph (3) of paragraph 1, the Scheme shall apply to every employee, - (b) who has been a member of the ceased Employees’ Family Pension Scheme, 1971 before the commencement of this Scheme from 16th November, 1995; 10. Determination of Pensionable Service- (1) The pensionable service of the member shall be determined with reference to the contributions [received or receivable] on his behalf in the Employees’ Pension Fund. (2) In case of the member who superannuates on attaining the age of 58 years,3[and] who has rendered 20 years pensionable service or more, his pensionable service shall be increased by adding a weightage of 2 years. 12. Monthly Member’s Pension – (3) In the case of an existing member in respect of whom the date of commencement of pension is after the 16th November, 2005- (b) Past service pension shall be as given below: - The past service pension payable on completion of 58 years of age on the 16th November, 1995. (4) In the case of an existing member and in respect of whom the date of commencement of pension is between 16th November, 2000 and 16th November, 2005 - (i) superannuation or early pension shall be equal to the aggregate of - (a) pension as determined under sub-paragraph (2) for the period of service rendered from the 16th November, 1995 or Rs. 438/- per month whichever is more; (b) past service pension as provided in sub-paragraph (3) (ii) The aggregate of (a) and (b) calculated as above shall be subject to a minimum of Rs. 600/- per month provided the eligible service is 24 years. Rule 12 deals with the Monthly Pension Rule 12 (3) is applicable in the case of an existing member in respect of whom the date of commencement of pension is after 16.11.2005. This clause is not applicable to the case of the complainant since the complainant had attained superannuation on attaining 58 years on 14.1.2004. In the case of the complainant, Clause 12(4) would be applicable which deals with the case of an existing member and in respect of whom the date of commencement of pension is between 16.11.2000 and 16.11.2005. Rule 10(2) provides that in case of a member who superannuates at the age of 58 years and who has rendered 20 years pensionable service or more, his pensionable service shall be increased by adding the weightage of 2 years. As per Clause 6.2.14 of the Manual of Accounting Procedure, eligible service explained is as under: “Eligible Service 6.2.14 The eligibility for pension is determined with reference to ‘eligible service’. This comprises of the services namely, ‘past service’ and ‘actual service’. The period of past service relates to service rendered by the employees under the Employees’ Family Pension Scheme from 1.3.1971 to 15.11.1995. The actual service is the period of service rendered by the employees commencing from a date on or after 16.11.1995 till the date of exit from the employment or attainment of 58 years of age, whichever is earlier. The period either under past service or under actual service or both, as the case may be, will constitute eligible service. The eligibility for monthly pension to the member is determined with reference to ‘eligible service’ only. The period of ‘past service’ and ‘actual service’ should be rounded off separately to the nearest year to determine the eligibility for pension. If on account of rounding off alone the eligibility is denied such cases may be referred to Central Office”. Thus, the eligible service comprises of ‘past service’ and ‘actual service’. The ‘past service’ relates to service rendered by the employee under the Employees’ Pension Scheme from 1.3.1971 to 15.11.1995. Thus, the ‘past service’ of the complainant, which is to be considered for eligible of pension, is 24 years as on 15.11.1995. The said paragraph 6.2.14 further provides with ‘actual service’ is the period of service rendered by the employee commencing from the date of order dated 16.11.1995 till the date of attaining of 58 years, whichever is earlier. The complainant had served for 8 years after 15.11.1995. The said paragraph 6.2.14 further provides that period under ‘past service’ or under ‘actual service’ or both as the case may be, will constitute eligible service. Thus, the complainant had 24 years past service and 8 years of actual service after coming into force of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 and since the said service is more than 20 years, he would be entitled to weightage of two years in terms of Rule 10(2) of the said Rules. Paragraph 6.2.13 of the Manual of Accounting Procedure which provides that the weightage is due to be given only in the year November, 2015 does not get any support from any provision in the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 and the said paragraphs of 6.2.13 in the Manual Accounting Procedure is not in accordance with the provisions in the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995. In view of the above, I am of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to 2 years weightage under Rule 10(2) of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 and his pension has been rightly ordered to be fixed by the Fora below in terms of Rule 12(4) read with Rule 10(2) of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995. The orders of the Fora below, therefore, do not call for any interference. The revision is without any merit and is dismissed with cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent. The complainant shall pay the arrears of pension within 3 months with 9% interest thereon from the date the same are due.