JUDGMENT

1. This Court vide order dated 15.03.2016, 02.05.2016 and 04.05.2016 vide a common order in related cases being similar and identical in nature, had disposed of the same accordingly.

2. Not being satisfied with the orders of this Court mentioned above, some of the petitioners had approached the Division Bench of this Court by way of appeal and this Court in the Division Bench vide a common order dated 23.10.2017 had disposed of 21 related appeals by remanding the same for reconsideration by this Court.

3. Accordingly, this Court on remand had taken up the case of Ramesh Lal Tomta and 16 others which were pursued by the parties herein.

4. Again, the contentious issue being similar and almost identical inasmuch as it involves the impugned orders passed by the respondent authority whereby the petitioners herein were compulsorily retired from service on completion of 30 (thirty) years of qualifying service in public interest apparently on the ground of being placed in low medical category. The respondent authority has resorted to application of Rule 56(j) of the Fundamental Rules and Rule 48(1) (b) of the Central Civil Services (Pension Rules), 1972 while affecting the said impugn