JUDGMENT 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Dr. R.G. Padia, learned counsel appearing for the State of U.P. 2. This petition is directed against the order passed by the State of U.P. under Rule 37 Sub-clause 2 of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities (Centralised) Services Rule, 1975. The petitioner is a Registrar of a University. The above mentioned Rule 37 (2) empowers the State Government to retire a member of a Centralised service on attaining age of 57 years on three months notice or pay on lieu of the whole or part thereof, if the State Government consider it necessary to do so in years. The present order has been passed under Rule 37 (2) of in public interest. 3. The learned counsel for the State of U.P. placed before us the original record. We have examined the record. We are satisfied from the record that the order passed is bonafide and in public interest. It cannot be said that the State Government has passed the order arbitrarily or malafide. From the record, we further find that the petitioners integrity had been withheld consecutively for two years. 4. In the circumstances, in our opinion, we do not think it a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petition is accordingly dismissed.