IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J Review Petition Lodging No. 49 of 2004 in Writ Petition No.3l76 of 2002 State of Maharashtra ... applicant vs Dr S G Pimpale and ors..Respondents Mr M D Naik AGP for applicant Mr.Mihir Desai for respondent no.l Mr. A L Patki for respondent no. 2 CORAM: A.P.SHAH & RANJANA P DESAI JJ. CORAM: A.P.SHAH & RANJANA P DESAI JJ. CORAM: A.P.SHAH & RANJANA P DESAI JJ. Dated l4.l0.2004 Dated l4.l0.2004 Dated l4.l0.2004 P.C: l. The learned AGP appearing for the applicant submitted that previous service can be considered as per UGC guidelines dated 27.ll.l990 but because of several breaks, the writ petitioner is not entitled to get benefit of previous service. If the break is less than l80 days the service interposing may be counted, provided the break is condoned by the concerned University. However, in the case of writ petitioner break is l87 days i.e. more than l80 days. The writ petitioner is therefore entitled to placement in senior Grade from 24.l2.l987 and Selection Grade from 24.l2.l995 and designation as a Reader from 24.l2.l995. 2. We are unable to accept the submissions of the learned AGP. The Mumbai University has already condoned the delay vide letter dated l7.7.l998 at Exh F to the petition and the relevant portion of the said letter reads as under: "In reply, I am directed to inform you that the break in service of Dr S.G.Pimple Lecturer in Physics has been condoned for 3l4 days from 20.6.l979 to l.7.l979, 20.6.l98l to l3.8.l98l, 2l.4.l982 to 24.l0.l982, and 2l.4.l983 to l9.6.l983 for the purpose of getting pension cum gratuity benefits". 3. In any event the difference being only marginal i.e 7 days we are not inclined to entertain this review petition. Review petition is accordingly dismissed. The applicant is directed to implement the order 5.2.2003 within a period of two months from today.