1 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO. 121 OF 2009 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2138 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5347 OF 2009 Shri Lahu Shankar Patil ... Petitioner (Ori. Resp. No.1) v/s SEA CARRIERS SHIPPING PVT. LTD., & ANR. ... Respondents Mr.S.C.Naidu i/by M/s.C.R.Naidu & Co. for the petitioner. Ms.Nidhi Singh i/by Dunmorr Sett for the Resp. No.1. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 9TH OCTOBER, 2009 P.C.: 1. The review petition has been filed for a modification of Clause (ii) of the operative order passed on 23.10.2007. According to the learned advocate for the petitioner, the directions in Clause (ii) of the operative order have become illusory because the petitioner had attained the age of 60 years on 15.6.2006 and, therefore, he would not be 2 entitled to wages under Section 17B as mentioned in Clause (ii) of the operative order. He submits that the earlier paragraph indicates that no retirement age was fixed and, therefore, the petitioner would be entitled to continue beyond the age of 60 years. 2. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel, in my view, there is no need to pass orders in the review petition and the petitioner may request the Court to have the writ petition itself fixed for final hearing at an early date in view of the fact that he has crossed the age of 60 years. 3. Review petition dismissed. ..... 3