:1: :1: :1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4334 OF 2007 CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4334 OF 2007 CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4334 OF 2007 1.Dr.Mahadeo Ganpat Shitole and ors. .. Petitioners Vs 1. The State of Maharashtra, and ors. .. Respondents. Mr Devdas Keluskar i/b Mr Sudhir Prabhu, for the petitioners. Mr Sanjay Patil, AGP, for respondent no.1. Mr Girish Kulkarni a/w Swati Deshmukh, i/b M.G.Kulkarni, for the respondent-University. Along with Civil Application no.238 of 2009 Civil Application no.238 of 2009 Civil Application no.238 of 2009 IN IN IN CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4334 OF 2007 CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4334 OF 2007 CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4334 OF 2007 1.University of Pune, .. Applicant. Vs 1. Shri Mahadeo Ganpat Shitole and ors. .. Respondents. Mr Girish Kulkarni a/w Swatu Deshmukh, i/b M.G.Kulkarni, for the Applicant. Mr A.P.Vanarase, AGP, for the respondents-State. CORAM : S.B.MHASE & CORAM : S.B.MHASE & CORAM : S.B.MHASE & D.B.BHOSALE, JJ. D.B.BHOSALE, JJ. D.B.BHOSALE, JJ. DATE : 05.02.2009. DATE : 05.02.2009. DATE : 05.02.2009. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioners have approached this Court claiming that their age of retirement is 62 years and the respondents are trying to superannuate their :2: :2: :2: services at the age of 60 years. Therefore, the petition was admitted and the interim relief was granted. However, this issue has been considered by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.5338 of 2007 along with several other Writ Petitions and this Court delivered the Judgment on 28.11.2007. This Court has come to the conclusion that the age of retirement is 60 years for the petitioners and accordingly decided the said matters and ultimately all those petitions were dismissed. Since the issue involved in the present petition is no more res integra in view of the Judgment referred to above, this petition also is required to be dismissed in terms of the judgment referred above. However, since the petitioners were protected by the grant of interim relief, they were working with the respondents beyond the age of 60 years till today and, therefore, the petitioners apprehend that the respondents may recover the wages for the excess period rendered in the service. But we find that the petitioners were working under the orders of this court and they had actually rendered the services to the respondents and for the services rendered the respondents are under obligation to pay to them and, therefore, we clarify that even though the writ petition is dismissed, the respondents are not :3: :3: :3: entitled and shall not recover the amounts paid to the petitioners after the age of superannuation, and they shall fix up their pension without recovering the amounts paid, at the age of completion of 60 years on the last drawn salary on completion of 60 years. Therefore, we pass the following order: 3. The writ petition stands dismissed. However, the work, which has been rendered by the petitioners during pendency of the petition after completion of 60 years period, shall be treated as the work done at the directions of this court and the payments for the said period be given to the petitioners. We clarify that the said payments delivered after completion of 60 years shall not be recovered from the petitioners out of their pensionery benefits. The pension of the petitioners shall be fixed on last drawn salary by the petitioners on completion of 60 years as the age on superannuation. . In view of disposal of this petition, the Civil Application stands disposed of. (D.B.BHOSALE.J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE.J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE.J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.)