( 1 ) THE petitioner who was at the relevant time serving as Assistant Director of Industries Gujarat State and alleged to have voluntarily retired has by this petition challenged the action and orders of the respondent-State Government of not granting him benefits of Government Resolution No. 1070/5158/j dated 8-10-1970 on the ground that the petitioner has not voluntarily retired but was made to retire by the State Government. The important question therefore that arises for my consideration is whether the retirement of the petitioner is voluntary or he has been made to retire by the State Government after giving him three months notice as provided under rule 161 (1) (aa) (i) of the Bombay Civil Services Rules (B. C. S. R. ).

( 2 ) IT is not disputed that the petitioner was recruited as Inspector in the former State of Bombay on or about 3 1948 and in due course reached to the post of Assistant Director of Industries from 8 As disclosed from the correspondence as well as the affidavit of the Government the petitioner addressed a letter dated 2-1-1976 praying for retirement from service from 30-4-1976. The said letter was treated as notice of three months. There is a