/ 1/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5839 OF 2003 Captain Arvind Govind Sane ...Petitioner V/s. Superintending Engineer, Buildings and Communication Dept. Aurangabad Circle, & Anr. ...Respondents Shri.N.R. Bubna for Petitioner. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH & V.M. KANADE, JJ. DATED : 28th FEBRUARY, 2008. P.C.:- 1. The Petitioner is challenging the judgment and order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in the Original Application No.408 of 2000, dated 02/02/2001 as also judgment and order in the Review Application No.27 of 2001, dated 18/09/2001 as also seeking writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to give the Petitioner pension alongwith arrears and other consequential benefits of service. 2. Brief facts, in nutshell, are as under:- / 2/ . The Petitioner was appointed as an Overseer in the Irrigation Construction Division on 06/02/1959. The Petitioner worked in the said department till 22/06/1963. It is case of the Petitioner that the Government of Maharashtra had transferred the Petitioner on deputation without his consent or request and accordingly, he was relieved as an Overseer by the Deputy Engineer. It is case of the Petitioner that he performed the duties and functions which were entrusted to him in the Indian Army. It is case of the Petitioner that in June, 1965, he came to know that Emergency Commissioned Officers could be repatriated to their original department and he, therefore, made an application to the Assistant Secretary, Government of Maharashtra on 28th June, 1965. The Petitioner, thereafter, retired from the defence service from 31/08/1968. Grievance of the Petitioner is that after his retirement from the Indian Army, the Petitioner was neither given civil posting nor any consequential benefits of his service and therefore, he filed original application before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, praying for his pension and other consequential benefits. The Tribunal, however, rejected his original application. The Tribunal observed that there was no material to indicate that the Applicant had ever made an attempt to join his department after he was relieved from the Army and, therefore, rejected his original / 3/ application. His review application was also dismissed. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. The Respondents in the reply has stated that the Petitioner was appointed as an Overseer on temporary basis on 17/02/1959 and worked in the capacity of temporary Overseer. It was further stated that the Petitioner had not produced any correspondence except letter dated 28/06/1965 to show that he made an attempt to join the State Government services after he was relieved from the Army. For the first time, he wrote a letter to the Government on 24/04/2000 claiming seniority, increment and pension. It was further submitted that, therefore, there was gross delay of more than 32 years in seeking absorption in Government service. The Tribunal after examining material on record recorded a finding that the Applicant did not make any attempt to join his department after he was relieved from defence service and, therefore, he was not entitled to pension and other terminal benefits. 4. We have perused the impugned order. In our opinion, the Tribunal has not committed any error of law apparent on the face of record and as such, no case is, therefore, made out for interfering with the impugned order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in original application and / 4/ in review application. There is no material on record to indicate that the Petitioner had taken any steps to join the Maharashtra Government services after he was relieved from the Army in 1968 and only after he reached the age of superannuation, he sent a letter to the Joint Secretary of Government of Maharashtra in 2000. . Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. Under the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. ( D.K. DESHMUKH, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)