1 ca 5908.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5908 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 175 OF 2007 Chitra Theatre, Ahmednagar through M/s. Karandikar & Brothers, Partner Vilas S/o Vishwanath Karandikar .. Applicant Versus Gajanan S/o Laxman Kulkarni .. Respondent Shri Rajendra Deshmukh, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri Pradeep Shahane, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 10TH JUNE, 2011. PER COURT : . The present civil application is moved for vacating and/or modifying interim order passed by this Court on 16.01.2007 in the writ petition. Shri Deshmukh, the learned counsel states that in view of the provisions of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act and the standing orders the present non applicant has attained the age of superannuation i. e. 58 years on 01st May, 2010. According to the learned counsel as he has 2 ca 5908.11 attained age of superannuation, he cannot continue his service and prays for vacating and/or modifying interim order. 2. Shri Shahane, the learned counsel for non applicant submits that the age of superannuation is 60 years and not 58 years. As such, according to the learned counsel, the non applicant has not attained the age of superannuation and on this count the present civil application cannot be entertained. 3. This Court vide order dated 16.01.2007 had granted interim relief in terms of prayer clause "D", which reads as under d. grant stay on the execution and operation of the impugned order passed by the Labour Court Ahmednagar in Application (IDA) No. 11 of 2003 dated 20.04.2006 during the pendency and decision of this Writ Petition. 4. This Court vide the said order had also directed the present applicant to reinstate the petitioner and to pay his future salary regularly. In the said interim order, this Court had nowhere restrained the applicant from taking any further steps as are permissible in law in case further eventualities took place. 3 ca 5908.11 What is the age of superannuation is not a subject matter of dispute in the present writ petition and the same is not related to the present petition. 5. In the light of above, there is no necessity to vacate and/or modify the interim relief that is already granted. The civil application is accordingly disposed of. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/June 11