Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 6311 Bom
Judgement Date : 24 October, 2016
2410WP4215.05-Judgment 1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 4215 OF 2005
PETITIONERS :- 1. Smt.Vijaya W/o Krishnarao Kale, Aged about
57 years, Occ: Physical Education Director,
resident of Amravati.
2. Sudhakar Namdeo Ambhore, age 57 years,
Occupation - Lecturer, resident of Amravati.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS :-
ig 1. The State of Maharashtra, through its
Secretary, Higher and Technical Education
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2. University Grants Commission, through its
Secretary, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New
Delhi-2.
3. Government Vidarbha Institute of Science,
Through its Principal, Amravati.
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
2410WP4215.05-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 petitioners have sought a
declaration that the age of superannuation of the petitioners is 60 years
and the respondent No.3 should continue the petitioners in service till
they attain 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 petitioners
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 petitioners in view of the aforesaid
judgment and order. It is held in the aforesaid judgment that the
2410WP4215.05-Judgment 3/3
University Grants Commission recommendations, fixing the age of
retirement are directory in nature and the state government and the
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
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!