JUDGMENT : D.N. PATEL, J. 1. This Civil Review application has been preferred for review of judgment and order dated 24th June, 2010, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 5295 of 2006. 2. Counsel for the applicants (original respondents in the writ petition) submitted that as per the applicants, the date of birth of the respondent (original petitioner) is 26th August, 1955, to that effect entry was also made in the service book which was signed by the respondent (original petitioner). Similarly, Apex Medical Board was also constituted and has examined the respondent and gave the report on 26th July, 2007 and age of the respondent was determined as on that date as 62 years and six months. On the basis of this report also the date of birth of the respondent comes to 26th January, 1955 and therefore, as per the applicants the respondent has already retired on 31st August, 2005 because age of superannuation is 60 years whereas, as per the respondent (original petitioner) her date of birth is 26th August, 1957 without any evidence on record. 3. Counsel appearing for the applicants further submitted that a supplementary counter affidavit was already filed by the applicants (original respondents) in W.P. (S) No. 5295 of 2006 on 23rd March, 2010, but, inadvertently this affidavit was not referred and it has been observed by the learned Single Judge in order dated 24th June, 2010 that no supplementary counter affidavit has been filed by the applicants (original respondents) and hence, the Apex Medical Board was directed to examine the respondent (original petitioner). Nonetheless, fact remains that supplementary counter affidavit was already filed by the applicants on 23rd March, 2010 i.e. much earlier than the date of order dated 24th June, 2010 and already Apex Medical Board was constituted and the respondent was examined by the Apex Medical Board. The report was also at Annexure-B series to the supplementary affidavit filed by the applicants and hence, there was no need by the learned Single Judge to constitute Apex Medical Board for examination of the respondent and hence, the order passed by this Court dated 24th June, 2010 in W.P. (S) No. 5295 of 2006 requires to be modified. 4. The report was also at Annexure-B series to the supplementary affidavit filed by the applicants and hence, there was no need by the learned Single Judge to constitute Apex Medical Board for examination of the respondent and hence, the order passed by this Court dated 24th June, 2010 in W.P. (S) No. 5295 of 2006 requires to be modified. 4. Counsel for the respondent could not controvert the aforesaid facts of filing of supplementary counter affidavit by the applicants (original respondents) on 23rd March, 2010 and could not also controvert the fact that Apex Medical Board has already examined this respondent (original petitioner) and has given report which is at Annexure-B series to the supplementary counter affidavit. 5. Having heard counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the supplementary counter affidavit filed by these applicants (original respondents) was not pointed out before the learned Single Judge while finally disposing of W.P. (S) No. 5295 of 2006 and hence, the learned Single Judge has observed that as no supplementary counter affidavit has been filed Apex Medical Board will be constituted and the respondent (original petitioner) will be examined by the Apex Medical Board. The fact remains that these applicants (original respondents) had already filed supplementary counter affidavit dated 23rd March, 2010. Apex Medical Board was already constituted. Respondent was also examined and report has also been given by the Apex Medical Board which is at Annexure-B series to the supplementary counter affidavit filed by the applicants in W.P. (S) No. 5295 of 2006. The said Apex Medical Report is dated 26th July, 2007 and as on that date, the age of the respondent (original petitioner) was 62 years and six months and her date of birth comes to 26th January, 1955 and hence, the prayer of the original petitioner in W.P. (S) No. 5295 of 2006 cannot be granted nor there is any need of Apex Medical Board to be constituted for examination of the age of the original petitioner. Moreover, there is already entry made in the service book which is signed by the respondent (original petitioner) in which also the birth date is 26th August, 1955. Moreover, there is already entry made in the service book which is signed by the respondent (original petitioner) in which also the birth date is 26th August, 1955. Thus, the original petitioner has already reached to the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years as on 31st August, 2005 and hence, there is no substance in W.P. (S) No. 5295 of 2006 and the same is hereby, dismissed. 6. To the aforesaid extent the order, passed by this Court dated 24th June, 2010 in W.P. (S) No. 5295 of 2006 is hereby, modified. The writ petition preferred by the original petitioner stands dismissed. 7. This civil revision application is allowed and disposed of.