1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION No. 1024 OF 2011 (Smt. Medha S. Ghatnekar .vs. Municipal Commissioner, Akola and Ors.) _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. ______________________________________________________________________________ CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & A.P.BHANGALE, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 11, 2011. Heard Mr.S.A.Marathe, Adv. for the petitioner, Mr.S.V.Sohoni, Adv. for respondent no.1 and Mr.T.R.Kankale, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 2 and 3. Mr.S.A.Marathe, Adv. points out that the petitioner has worked since 1972-73 with different establishments and then she entered regular employment with respondents in 1994. Mr.S.V.Sohoni, Adv. for respondent no.1 states that the petitioner was employed at 43 years of age; the question of age relaxation first needs to be gone into and if that is granted, then only her entitlement to pension can be considered. He relies upon the affidavit to urge that the issue of age relaxation is being considered by General Body of Corporation. 2 We, therefore, direct respondent no.1 to consider the issue of age relaxation in accordance with law at the earliest and in any case, by 31.12.2011. If the age is relaxed, entitlement of petitioner to pension shall also thereafter be considered in accordance with law and within a further period of six weeks. With liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court again in the matter, if she has any grievance against any such decision or omission, we dispose of the petition. JUDGE JUDGE jais