KPP -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 18 OF 2011 N.S. Patil and another ... Petitioners versus The State of Maharashtra and another ..Respondents Mr. R.R. Tripathi for the petitioners. Ms. Aparna Vhatmar, AGP, for respondent No.1. Mr. Gajendrasingh Jadhavrao for respondent No.2. CORAM: P.B. MAJMUDAR & A.A. SAYED , JJ. DATE: FEBRUARY 24, 2011. P.C. Since petitioner no.1, who is a teacher and is also the beneficiary, this matter cannot be treated as a PIL wherein the prayer is made that the retirement age of teachers be increased from 58 to 60 years. Such type of PIL at the instance of a person who himself is personally interested in the matter cannot be entertained. If the petitioners have any other grievance, they can file individual petitions. Even otherwise, in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court of India, it is a well settled position of law that in service matters, PIL cannot be entertained. Hence PIL is rejected. P. B. MAJMUDAR, J. A.A. SAYED, J.