Judgment 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. Petitioner has/had filed the present writ application because he was made to retire at the age of 58 years while working on the post of Chief Chemist under respondent Sugar Corporation at Darbhanga. Petitioner submits that the decision of the respondents forcing the petitioner to retire at the age of 58 years is illegal decision and he had protested against the said decision as is evident from Annexures-4 and 5 but since the authority did not respond or react he filed this present application. 3. Petitioner made a short submission supported by various judicial orders which have been passed in identical matters by Division Bench or Single Bench of this High Court and the Supreme Court has affirmed the same in Annexure-6 series. A perusal of the same corroborates the stand and the assertion of the petitioner. The issue with regard to the age of retirement was considered in these writs and the courts had held that the age of retirement of employees of Sugar Corporation would be 60 years and not 58 years. This being the settled legal position the petitioner has made a legal case for interference. The decision of the respondents to force the petitioner to retire at the age of 58 years is hereby set aside. The petitioner will be treated in service till he reaches the age of 60 years which according to the petitioner was on 21.1.2007. Needless to say that the petitioner would also be entitled to his claim and other benefits which have been granted to other situated employees of (Annexure-6 series). This application is allowed with this direction.