1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 1495 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 1495 OF 2011 *** 1. Heard Advocate Mr. Sapkal for the Petitioner, learned A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Shri Sapkal fairly states that impugned order is dated 26th March, 2010 and before its implementation the Respondent No.3 attained age of superannuation and, therefore, even if order is to be upheld, she stood retired. His contention is, she was dismissed after regular departmental inquiry for proved misconduct on 29th January, 2009 and, therefore, it cannot be said that on 31st March, 2010 she has superannuated. He further contends that the petition is filed only because of apprehension that Respondent No.3 may on the strength of that interlocutory order take coercive steps against the petitioner/ management. 2. Till date, the Respondent No.3 has not taken any coercive steps. It is apparent 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 1495 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. that whether she has retired from service or not is disputed issue which can be resolved only after final adjudication of appeal before Tribunal. I, therefore, do not find any prejudice caused to the petitioner, at this stage. With liberty to approach again, if any coercive steps against them are initiated, on the strength of impugned order, present writ petition is disposed of. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:25/03/2011. ans/1495