Dr. Mrs. Aarti W/O Ashok Saoji vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Its ...

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 6312 Bom
Judgement Date : 24 October, 2016

Bombay High Court
Dr. Mrs. Aarti W/O Ashok Saoji vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Its ... on 24 October, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
     2410WP4425.05-Judgment                                                                         1/3


                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                              
                            NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.




                                                                    
                          WRIT PETITION NO. 4425    OF    2005


     PETITIONER :-                        Dr. Mrs. Aarti W/o Ashok Saoji, aged about




                                                                   
                                          57   years,   Occupation-Professor   in   Botany,
                                          Institute of Science, Nagpur. 

                                             ...VERSUS... 




                                                   
     RESPONDENTS :-              1)       The   State   of   Maharashtra,   through   its
                                          Secretary,   Higher   and   Technical   Education
                               ig         Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. 

                                 2)       University   Grants   Commission,   through   its
                                          Secretary,   Bahadurshah   Zafar   Marg,   New
                             
                                          Delhi-2. 

                                 3)       Institute of Science, Ravinder Tagore Marg,
                                          Nagpur, Through its Rgistrar. 
      


                                 4)       The   Union   of   India,   through   its   Secretary,
                                          Ministry  of   Human  Resources  Development
   



                                          (Department of Education, New Delhi. 

                                 5)       Director   of   Higher   Education,   State   of
                                          Maharashtra, Pune. 





     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Mr.A.J.Dhobale, counsel h/f Mr. R.S.Parsodkar, 
                                     counsel for the petitioner.
     Mr. A.A.Madiwale, Asstt. Govt.Pleader for the respondent Nos.1, 3 & 5. 





                        Mrs.U.A.Patil, counsel h/f Mrs. M.P.Munshi, 
                            counsel for the respondent Nos.2 & 4. 
     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                            CORAM : SMT. VASANTI    A    NAIK & 
                                                        KUM. INDIRA JAIN,   JJ.

DATED : 24.10.2016 ::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2016 00:35:08 ::: 2410WP4425.05-Judgment 2/3 O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per Smt.Vasanti A Naik, J.) By this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a declaration that the age of superannuation of the petitioner is 60 years and the respondent No.3 should continue the petitioner in service till she attains the age of 60 years.

2. Shri Madiwale, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4, states that the issue involved in this case was involved in Writ Petition No.6529 of 2005 (Shri Shripati Bhiva Kamble v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.) and this Court had by the order dated 30/09/2005, dismissed the writ petition by relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in 1992 Supp (3) SCC 191 (T.P. George and others v. State of Kerala and others). It is stated that the case of the petitioner would stand covered by the aforesaid order dated 30/09/2005. It is stated that in view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

3. On a perusal of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in 1992 Supp (3) SCC 191 and the order dated 30/09/2005 in Writ Petition No.6529 of 2005, it appears that the issue stands answered against the petitioner in view of the aforesaid judgment and order. It is held in the aforesaid judgment that the University Grants Commission recommendations, fixing the age of retirement are directory in nature and the state government and the ::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2016 00:35:08 ::: 2410WP4425.05-Judgment 3/3 concerned university could fix the age of retirement as 58 years in the government colleges.

4. Hence, for the reasons recorded in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in 1992 Supp (3) SCC 191 and the order dated 30/09/2005 in Writ Petition No.6529 of 2005, we dismiss this writ petition with no order as to costs. Rule stands discharged.

                                 JUDGE                                   JUDGE 

     KHUNTE
                            
      
   






    ::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2016                          ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2016 00:35:08 :::