- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5131/2008 Baburao s/o Shankarrao Sarkale, age 57 yrs., occu.Librarian in People’s College, Nanded, r/o Yeshwant Nagar, extension Nanded. ...Petitioner.. Versus 1] The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary of Department of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2] Swami Ramanand Tirth Marathwada University, Nanded. Through its Registrar. 3] Joint Director of Higher Education, Nanded. 4] People’s College Nanded, through its Principal, Near Sneha Nagar, College Road, Nanded. ...Respondents... ..... Shri R.J. Godbole, Advocate for petitioner. Shri K.G. Patil, AGP for respondent nos.1 & 3. - 2 - Respondent no.2 served. Shri S.V. Natu, Advocate for respondent no.4. ..... CORAM: MOHIT S. SHAH, CJ & S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE: 25.08.2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Chief Justice): 1] Heard counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Counsel for the respondents waive service of Rule notice. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, petition is taken up for final hearing. 2] The petitioner was employed as a Librarian at the relevant time. In the present petition filed on 21.8.2008, the petitioner had prayed for a declaration and direction that the petitioner was entitled to continue in service as a Librarian till completion of 60 years of age, but the respondents were preparing papers to retire the petitioner from service with effect from 31.8.2008 upon completion of 58 years of age. The said decision dated 16.7.2008 was challenged on the ground that the respondents were erroneously seeking to apply the rule for higher qualifications for the post of Librarian and on the ground that the petitioner was not having those higher qualifications, the petitioner was required to be retired at the age of 58 years. - 3 - 3] While entertaining the petition, this Court granted interim stay on 27.8.2008 and the said stay order has continued to operate till today. The petitioner will be completing 60 years of age on 31.8.2010 i.e. just after five days. In view of the fact that the petitioner is completing 60 years of age after about five days, we would have disposed of this petition on that ground alone. However, having regard to the fact that the services rendered by the petitioner for the last almost two years were rendered under an interim order of this Court and disposing of the petition without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy may result into denial of retiral benefits for the period after 1.9.2008, for that limited purpose, we have considered it appropriate to consider the merits of the controversy between the parties. 4] The learned Government Pleader has invited our attention to the University Grants Commission’s guidelines under which the Librarian is required to possess the higher qualification for career advancement scheme. In our view, the said guidelines as included in the circular dated 19.10.2006 at Exhibit H to the petition would have no relevance as those guidelines are for the purpose of prescribing the career advancement scheme and not for the purpose of reducing the age of retirement from 60 years, which is the retirement age for employees in the colleges in the State of Maharashtra. On the contrary, the age of superannuation for Librarians covered by the circular dated 19.10.2006 is 62 years, but since the petitioner is not claiming any benefit on the basis of the said circular, we are not required to consider the question whether the age of superannuation should be 60 - 4 - years or 62 years. 5] The Government resolution dated 11.12.1999 at Exhibit C – page 20 of the petition, clearly indicates in para 22 that the age of superannuation for Librarians, who are being treated at par with the teachers, will be 60 years. In view of the above clear position as laid down in the Government circular dated 11.12.1999, which is not disputed, the writ petition will have to be allowed. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned communication dated 16.7.2008 at Exhibit A is quashed and set aside and it is declared that the petitioner is entitled to continue in service till reaching the age of superannuation, which is 60 years, and, therefore, till 31.8.2010. The respondents shall accordingly compute the pensionary benefits payable to the petitioner on the basis that the petitioner’s age of superannuation will be completed as on 31.8.2010. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) ndk/c258107