(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL) In these group of writ petitions, the only issue pressed before us is about the validity of Rule 21(1)(2) and the proviso to Gujarat Judicial Services Rules, 2005 as also Rule 10(4) of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2005, as invalid and ultra vires to the Articles 14, 16, 19, 21 and 311 of the Constitution of India.

2.The petitioners, who were appointed as Judges in the State of Gujarat under the Gujarat State Judicial Services Rules, 2005, seek to challenge the validity of Rule 21 thereof on the ground that unfettered power has been conferred upon the appointing authority to compulsorily retire a member of the judicial service who has attained the age of 50 years, without providing minimum period of services, which should have been rendered by such member of judicial service before considering to retire him compulsorily. We may note that reference to the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2002 in the matter is wholly irrelevant and no argument has been rendered by the learned senior counsel on the validity of Rule 10(4) of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2002.

3.The contentio