J.N.Bhatt, J.

1. The Sole issue, which is brought into focus by the petitioner, in this petition, by invocation of the Constitutional Writ remedy under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for our consideration and adjudication, has been "as to whether the order of compulsory retirement recorded against the petitioner, who was working at the relevant time, as District & Sessions Judge, in the Superior Judicial Service, in the State of Bihar, in terms of the provisions of Rule 74(b)(ii) of the Bihar Service Code, 1952 (Bihar Code) and denying him the benefit of the extended age from 58 to 60 years, passed by the State Government under the order of the Governor and on the recommendation of the High Court, upon exercise of Administrative wisdom and Jurisdiction, in terms of the constitutional powers, under Art. 235 of the Constitution of India, requires any interference by this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India ?

2. Thus, shortly stating, the Petitioning Judicial Officer has invited a legal battle between the exercise of Constitutional Power under Art. 235 and Constitutional Duty under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India in this petition for our consideratio