9-IA-3789-2026.DOC Rekha Patil IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3789 of 2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 11453 OF 2023 Mahendra Vilas Phalke & Ors. ...Applicants IN THE MATTER BETWEEN Mahendra Vilas Phalke & Ors. …Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary, Public Health Department & Ors. …Respondents Mr. Abhijeet A. Desai with Ms. Mohini A. Desai (Rehpade), Mr. Vijay P. Singh, Mr. Manan Daga, Ms. Daksha P., G. Shaik i/b Desai Legal LLP, for the Applicants/Petitioners. Mr. B. V. Samant, Addl. G. P. with Ms. R. A. Salunkhe, AGP, for the Respondents-State. None for the Respondent No.7-AG. CORAM: SUMAN SHYAM & GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, JJ. DATED: 22nd SEPTEMBER 2026. PC:- 1. The Representative of the office of the Accountant General has not appeared in this case despite service of notice. 2. The claim of the Original Applicants/Writ Petitioners to continue in service upto the age of 60 years, as against the original statutory prescription of 58 years, has been declined by the learned REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Digitally signed by REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Date: 2026.09.23 11:09:37 +0530 9-IA-3789-2026.DOC Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (‘MAT’), by the impugned Judgment and Order dated 31st August, 2023, passed in Original Application No. 623 of 2023. 3. Aggrieved by the order dated 31st August, 2023, the Original Applicants, as Writ Petitioners, have approached this Court by filing this Writ Petition. By the interim order dated 5th October, 2023, passed in this proceeding, the Writ Petitioners have been permitted to continue in service until such time, they attained the age of 60 years. There is no controversy about the fact that all the Writ Petitioners, in the meantime, have crossed 60 years and, therefore, viewed from any angle, they have retired from service upon attaining the age of superannuation. The only question that is, now material is, as to whether, their pensionary claims should be settled by taking the age of retirement as 60 years or it should be done by treating the same as 58 years. The aforesaid issue is subjudice before this Court in the pending Writ Petition No. 11453 of 2023. Hearing of the Writ Petition may take some time. 4. Under such circumstances, the Writ Petitioners have taken out this Interim Application seeking an interim order directing the Respondents for settling their pension and other retirement dues 9-IA-3789-2026.DOC by treating the retirement age as 60 years, based on the last drawn pay. The Application has, however, been stoutly opposed by Mr. B. V. Samant, learned AGP appearing for the State. 5. On a pointed query made by this Court, Mr. Desai, learned Counsel for the Applicants/Petitioners has submitted that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of his clients in the Writ Petition, the Writ Petitioners will be willing to provisionally accept the pension and other retirement dues, based on their last drawn pay on attaining the age of 58 years. However, such settlement must be made subject to the final order passed in Writ Petition. Mr. B. V. Samant, learned AGP, is agreeable to such a recourse. 6. In view thereof, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the claim of the Applicants/Writ Petitioners, we dispose of this Interim Application by providing that the pension and other retirement dues of the Applicants be settled, on the basis of their last pay drawn, by treating their age of retirement as 58 years. Such settlement of retirement dues would, however, be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Applicants in the pending Writ Petition and shall be subject to the further order that may be passed therein. Page 3 of 4 9-IA-3789-2026.DOC 7. Needless to say that the pension and other retirement dues of the Applicants should be settled, in terms of this order, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than 60 (sixty) days form the date of uploading of this order. 8. Interim Application stands disposed of accordingly. (GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.) (SUMAN SHYAM, J.) {