1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3881/2008 (President, Balapur Taluka Co.Op. Sale Purchase and Procurement and another vs,. Pralhad Jagannath Bhaitilak) CORAM : B.P.Dhamadhikari, J. DATE : 2 nd DECEMBER, 2008 Heard Advocate Shri Joshi for petitioners and Advocate Shri Chopde, for respondent. Considering the nature of controversy, the matter is heard finally. The only contention of Advocate Shri Joshi is that respondent was supervisor in petitioners' establishment. The respondent came to be terminated on 23rd June, 2000. He challenged that termination before the Labour Court and the Labour Court granted relief of reinstatement with backwages. The Industrial Court in revision filed by the petitioners, did not sustain the relief of reinstatement, but granted relief of backwages after observing that the petitioners did not issue any order of superannuation to respondent. Advocate Joshi states that admittedly when the respondent had reached the age of superannuation before the date of termination, the absence of order of retirement or superannuation was not very relevant. He points out that present respondent in his evidence before the Labour Court 2 candidly admitted in 2006 that since the year 2005, he was having a card of senior citizen. That is, he was above 65 years of age in 2005. The perusal of evidence, particularly paragraph 9 of cross-examination of respondent shows that he was above 65 years of age in 2005. That means, he was about 60 years of his age in 2000 i.e. on the date of termination. Being supervisor, his age of superannuation was 58 years and therefore, the relief of reinstatement has rightly been rejected. Advocate Chopde tried to contend that respondent had also produced a school leaving certificate. But, I find the learned Member of Industrial Court has not made reference to any school leaving certificate, but found fault with the relief of reinstatement as granted by the Labour Court after noticing the senior citizen card with the respondent, however, then it maintained the relief of backwages because there was no order of superannuation. It is apparent that order of backwages after reaching the age of superannuation could not have been granted. The respondent, however, is free to recover the gratuity, provident fund, if any, as per his service conditions, after reaching the age of superannuation, as applicable to him on the date of termination. In this view of the matter, the impugned direction of the Industrial Court maintaining grant of 3 backwages to the present respondent is quashed and set aside. Writ petition is accordingly allowed, however, in the facts of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE Rvjalit