JUDGMENT

Dr. AR. Lakshmanan, J.-The questions involved in these three appeals are identical and they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. By order dated 23.03.1999, the appellants, who are the officers of the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service, were retired from service w.e.f. 31-03-1999 on attaining the age of superannuation. The appellants, who received the order, challenged the same before the High Court of Rajasthan by filing writ petitions which were disposed of by a Division Bench of the said Court. The two learned Judges who constituted the Division Bench rendered two concurrent judgments. While the conclusion was the same, the reasons were different. While one learned Judge held that the order of 23-03-1999 retiring the appellants was sustainable under the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, the other learned Judge held that the order was sustainable under the All India Judges Association and Others vs. Union of India & Ors. (Review Case) reported in (1993) 4 SCC 288. All the writ petitions were dismissed by the High Court and being aggrieved by the said judgments, the appellants preferred the above appeals in this Court.

3. We have gone through the two concurrent judg