1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 1152/2006 (Prof. Khalil-Ur-Rahman Ansari VERSUS The Union of India thro. its Secretary & others ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Mr. Kadu, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. S.K. Mishra, A.S.G. for the R-1. Ms. Tanna, counsel for the R-2. Mr. C.S. Kaptan, counsel for the R-6 & 7. Mr. P.B. Patil, counsel for the R-8. CORAM : D.D.SINHA AND SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, JJ. DATE : APRIL 7, 2008. C.A. NO. 2618/2008. Heard. This civil application is moved by the respondent no.8 for dismissal of the petition in view of the order of this Court dated 27.08.2003 passed in Writ Petition No.2455/2003. It is not in dispute that in the said writ petition as well as in the present writ petition, the validity of the Government Resolution dated 27.02.2003 issued by the State of Maharashtra was/is challenged. Considered the rival contentions. Perused the order dated 27.08.2003 passed by the Division Bench of this Court. The Division Bench of this Court considered the challenge to the Government Resolution dated 27.02.2003 2 issued by the State of Maharashtra and has observed thus----- “After careful consideration of the package scheme for revision of pay scales and the maintenance of standards of technical education, with an intention to provide a bench mark for creating ideal Polytechnics with competent teaching staff, the State Government has now decided to implement the Package Scheme with the terms and conditions of service as mentioned below. In continuation of Government Resolutions, Higher and Technical Education Department No.RPS2199/30/ TE-6, dated 18.12.1999 and dated 9.5.2000 it is further ordered that the package scheme for revision of pay scales and service conditions of the Librarians and teachers in Polytechnics and other equivalent institutions will be as under. It would be thus seen that the entire package scheme by this Government Resolution has been framed for revision of pay scales and maintenance of the standards of the 3 technical education in the light of the recommendation of the Fifth Pay Commission. The Scheme takes care of pay scales, cadre structure, incentives for higher qualification, career advancement, teaching ways, workload, job responsibility, accountability and also superannuation and re-employment. Keeping in view, the entire scheme reflected from the Government Resolution dated 27.2.2003, the fixation of age of Superannuation by the State Government up to 58 years for the teachers and librarians in Polytechnic and other equivalent institutions, can hardly be faulted.” In the backdrop of the above referred facts as well as considering the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court, the challenge raised by the petitioner in the said petition to the Government Resolution dated 27.02.2003 has been disallowed. In the present writ petition, the cause of action being identical, we are of the view that the challenge raised in the present writ petition to the Government Resolution dated 27.02.2003 also cannot be sustained in law. 4 Hence, the civil application is allowed. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed in view of the order dated 27.08.2003 passed in Writ Petition No.2455/2003. In view of dismissal of the writ petition, the civil application No.2619/2008 is also dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE APTE