1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.2934 of 2008 (Union of India and Ors. vs. Satish s/o. Late Shri Balkrishna Patil and anr.) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= CORAM : D.D.Sinha and A.P.Bhangale, JJ. DATE : 22.7.2008. Heard Mr.S.B.Bangde, Adv. for Petitioner. This Writ Petition is directed against the order dt.6.11.2007 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai whereby the Original Application filed by the petitioner came to be allowed. Considered the contentions canvassed by the learned counsel. Perused the impugned order. Perusal of the impugned order shows that it is not in dispute that the petitioners do have power for relaxation of age. It is also not in dispute that the respondent was otherwise found eligible and suitable on merits and was approved. In such a situation, the Tribunal has concluded that the respondent should have been given order of appointment by giving relaxation in age, which is already given to the similarly circumstanced employees. Counsel for petitioners does not dispute that there is a power of relaxation of age. In that view of the 2 matter, no case is made out for showing indulgence. Hence, the petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDG ssj