As per case facts, the Petitioner, a Daily Labour Roll (DLR) employee, served as a watchman since 1984. He was brought into the Work-Charged Establishment in 2012, instead of being ... regularized into the Regular Establishment, despite serving for over three decades and vacant posts being available. He retired in 2015 without pensionary benefits. The question arose whether the State's failure to regularize his service and extend pensionary benefits was discriminatory and arbitrary, particularly given similar cases where such benefits were granted. Finally, the Court directed the State to notionally bring the Petitioner into the Regular/Pensionable Establishment for the period necessary to qualify for pension and extend all pensionary and consequential benefits within three months, citing the State's obligation as a model employer and the principle of equality.