Ranjit Singh, J.

1. Judicial Officer retired compulsorily has filed this writ petition to pray for a very limited relief. He pleads that his request for voluntary retirement w.e.f 29.8.2003, as made by him, be accepted instead of retiring him compulsorily w.e.f. 2.9.2003 and the order of compulsory retirement be withdrawn. As per counsel for the petitioner, this order would rather be beneficial to the State inasmuch as the petitioner would then be required to deposit a sum of Rs. 64,500/-, which will be an amount payable on account of shortfall in the notice period of three months issued by the petitioner and the State will also be able to get back a sum of Rs. 71,975/- paid to the petitioner in lieu of notice while directing his compulsory retirement.

2. The facts, leading to filing of the petition and the prayer as made, noticed in brief are that the petitioner at the relevant time was working as Additional District and Sessions Judge in the State of Haryana. He had initially joined the service as Subordinate Judicial Officer on 14.5.1981 and had completed 22 years of judicial service, when he made a request for voluntary retirement through his letter dated 25.7.2003. The petitioner had prayed for his retirement w.e.f 10.11.2003, thus giving notice for three months. Later, the petitioner remitted an amount of Rs. 64,500/- and prayed that he be voluntary retired w.e.f 29.8.2003. The petitioner had also undertaken to pay any additional amount, if due, on account of the shortfall of this notice period.

3. The petitioner would plead that no disciplinary case was either pending or under contemplation, when he submitted his request for voluntary retirement. He would also plead that once he has submitted this request, then under law there may not be a need to accept the same and that he would be deemed to have been retired w.e.f 29.8.2003 i.e. the date when he remitted his salary in lieu of the period falling short of the three months notice as required by the statute. Instead, an order dated 2.9.2003 was served on the petitioner alongwith a bank draft of Rs. 71,975/- on 5.9.2003. Vide this order, the petitioner was compulsorily retired from his judicial service. In this background, the petitioner has made a prayer for permitting him to voluntary retire from service w.e.f 29.8.2003 instead of giving effect to the order of compulsory retirement w.e.f 2.9.2003. As per the petitioner, this will be an advantageous to the State as he would not only then have to refund the amount of Rs. 71,975/- paid to him by the Government but he would also be required to deposit a sum of Rs. 64,500/-, as was sent by him while forwarding his request for voluntary retirement.

4. Rule 3.26 of Punjab Civil Services Rules , Volume 1 (as applicable to Haryana), when read with note 8, requires three months salary and all allowances to be paid simultaneously with the retirement order. The petitioner, thus, would contend that salary for three months would work out to be Rs. 1,02,627/- whereas he was only paid Rs. 71,975/-. So, the petitioner would plead violation of the statutory provisions contained in the Rules to make first ground of his challenge to the order of his compulsory retirement. The petitioner would further make a grievance that his request for voluntary retirement, by dispensing with the condition of three months notice period, was never forwarded to the competent authority i.e. Governor of Haryana and the same was declined by a non-speaking order passed by respondent No. 1 (High Court). Though his request was declined but the amount of Rs. 64,500/- sent by him alongwith request letter was not refunded.

5. The record would show that the order of compulsory retirement of the petitioner is statedly passed in public interest. The petitioner would term this to be contrary to the public interest as such and also in violation of the Rules. He would refer to some of the instances where such request made by Judicial Officers was granted and in t