As per case facts, the petitioner, an ex-serviceman, was re-employed by the Respondent No.1-Commission after his military service. His claim for pension, gratuity, and leave encashment arising from this re-employment ... was rejected, leading him to file a writ petition. The question arose whether a re-employed individual, particularly an ex-serviceman appointed on a temporary or contract basis, is entitled to pension and other retiral benefits, especially when the employer's rules do not provide for such benefits or create regular pensionable posts. Finally, the Court clarified that pension is a right, not a bounty, and is subject to fulfilling minimum qualifying service under applicable rules and the nature of appointment (substantive and permanent). Since the petitioner was appointed temporarily, and the respondent-Commission never intended to create regular pensionable posts, nor did the applicable rules provide for these benefits to re-employed pensioners, the petition was dismissed.