G.K. VYAS, J.

1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, Mohammed Saleem Malik, Officer of Higher Judicial Services, challenging the order dated 31.03.2010 (Annex.9), by which the State Government while exercising powers under Rule 53 (1) of the Rajasthan Civil Service (pension) Rules, 1996, (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules of 1996’) on the recommendation of the Rajasthan High Court, compulsorily retired the officer in public interest on the date of receipt of said order by payment to him of three months’ pay and allowance in lieu of three months’ previous notice.

2. As per facts of the case, the petitioner was initially appointed as Munsif and Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 21.01.1992 after due selection in accordance with Rajasthan Judicial Services Rules, 1951. After completion of probation period, he was confirmed on the post of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 11.11.1994 and further he was promoted to the post of Civil Judge (Sr. Division)-cum-Add. Chief Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 06.12.2000.

3. The petitioner was further promoted as Addl. District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) on ad-hoc basis vide order dated 13.12.2004 and thereafter an order was passed on 31.03.2010, whereby on the basis of recommendations of the High Court, the petitioner was compulsorily retired from the services while giving salary of three months of Rs.1,61,982/-.

4. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition challenging the order of compulsory retirement, so also, a prayer has been made in the petitioner to quash the Circular dated 20.07.2007 (Annex.8) so also, Rule 53 of the Rules of 1996, but during the course of arguments the prayers to quash the Circular dated 20.07.2007 and challenge to Rule 53 of the Rules of 1996 were not pressed by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that right from entering into the services, the petitioner was granted promotion from time to time on the basis of his satisfactory service right from his initial appointment on the post of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, to the post of Addl. District & Sessions Judge, on ad-hoc basis, till 13.12.2004. According to petitioner, the last promotion on the post of Additional District Judge (Fast Track) was made in pursuance of policy laid down by the Union of India to appoint meritorious judges against fast track posts of Additional District Judge so as to reduce the pendency of the cases and in order to give speedy trial and speedy justice to the public. The case of the petitioner was considered under the said policy due to his meritorious satisfactory services on the post of ADJ (FT) with effect from 31.12.2004. As per petitioner, in his entire service tenure not a single memorandum or charge sheet was ever served upon him, so also, no adverse entries in his ACR was communicated and his services remained absolutely unblemished. It is also pointed out that in last preceding ten years from the date of compulsory retirement, the disposal percentage of the petitioner was very high and to prove the said fact details are incorporated in paragraph 10 of the writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that work of the petitioner was appreciated by all inspecting Judges of High Court where he was posted in his service tenure, and no adverse remark was ever made or communicated to him and as per petitioner’s knowledge most of the judgments rendered by him, were affirmed by the High Court. In none of the judgments, any adverse comments or structure were passed against the petitioner by any of the Hon’ble Judges or by the District Judges of the respective districts, where the petitioner discharged his duties. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that in Rule 53 of the Rules of 1996 there is provision for compulsory retirement. The said rule provides that at any point of time, after Government servant has completed 15 years qualifying service or has attained th