M. KATJU, J. ( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 25. 12. 1997 Annexure-13 to the writ petition. ( 2 ) WE have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel. ( 3 ) THE petitioner was a sub-registrar and his integrity for the years 1984-85, 1985-86 and 1986-87 was withheld vide order dated 30. 4. 1990 Annexure-la to the writ petition. Against that order he filed a representation which was rejected on 6. 7. 1991 vide Annexure-lc. He then filed a writ Petition No. 27333 of 1991. During the pendency of the said writ petition, he was compulsorily retired vide order dated 7. 3. 1992 vide Annexure-2 to the writ petition. He challenged this order in Writ Petition No. 4151 of 1992. This Court disposed of Writ Petition No. 27333 of. 1991 by order dated 7. 3. 1995 copy of which is Annexure-3 to the writ petition. By that judgment, the order dated 6. 7. 1991 rejecting the petitioners representation against the adverse entry was set aside. However, it can be seen in the Judgment dated 7. 3. 1996 in the aforesaid Writ petition No. 27333 of 1991 that the adverse entries were not set aside. This Court only directed that the order dated 6. 7. 1991 is a cryptic one without assigning any reason and hence it was set aside, in pursuance of the judgment of the High Court dated 7. 3. 1995 in Writ Petition No. 27333 of 1991, the petitioner made a representation to the State Government vide Annexure-4 to the writ petition. The State Government reinstated the petitioner as Sub-Registrar vide order dated 15. 5. 1995 Annexure-5 to the writ petition. However, subsequently, the petitioners representation was rejected by the order dated 20. 12. 1995 copy of which is Annexure-8 to the writ petition, in paragraph 12 of the petition, it is stated that on 11. 5. 1996, an order was passed by the inspector general Registration asking the petitioner to show cause why he should not be treated as compulsorily retired from 7. 3. 1992 in consequence to the order of the State Government dated 15. 5. 1995 and 20. 12. 1995. True copy of the aforesaid notices is Annexure-9. The petitioner made a representation on 13. 5. 3. 1992 in consequence to the order of the State Government dated 15. 5. 1995 and 20. 12. 1995. True copy of the aforesaid notices is Annexure-9. The petitioner made a representation on 13. 5. 1996 before the inspector General of Registration stating that he was reinstated as Sub-Registrar and hence the show cause notice be withdrawn as the inspector general of Registration passed an order dated 5. 5. 1997 Annexure-11 to the petition in favour of the petitioner and the show cause notice was cancelled. ( 4 ) IN paragraph 16 of the writ petition. It is alleged that the respondent No. 3 who was inimical to the petitioner came to know that a show cause has been cancelled by his predecessor and hence he passed the order dated 8. 12. 1997. Annexure-12 to the writ petition by which the petitioner was attached to the Head Quarter. Ultimately on 25. 12. 1997, the impugned order was passed copy of which is Annexure-13 to the writ petition. ( 5 ) A perusal of the impugned order shows that the petitioner has been compulsorily retired on 7. 3. 1992 but thereafter he was reinstated in view of order dated 15. 5. 1995. The order of the High court dated 7. 3. 1995 as already mentioned above did not quash the petitioners adverse entry but only quashed the order rejecting his representation. The petitioners representation was rejected on 20. 12. 1995 and hence the adverse entries for three years in question withholding the petitioners integrity stand confirmed. ( 6 ) IT is settled law that an order of compulsory retirement is not a punishment. Since there was adverse entries against the petitioner regarding his integrity, this Court cannot interfere with the impugned order. ( 7 ) HENCE, there is no force in this petition. It is accordingly dismissed. .