JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioner seeks to quash the order dated June 12, 1998 (Annexure-1) whereby the petitioner was retired after completing 25 years of qualifying service in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (2) of Rule 244 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. 2. The undisputed facts are that the petitioner was appointed as Land Surveyor in the Settlement Department in December 1964 and was promoted as Inspector in 1933. The details of adverse service record have been enclosed as Schedule-1 by the respondents along with the reply to the writ petition which read as under: (i) Vide order dated October 19, 1973 punishment of stoppage of one annual grade increment without cumulative effect was imposed and leave without pay from October 21, 1972 to May 17, 1973 was sanctioned. (ii) Vide order dated December 5, 1973 recorded warning was given. (iii) Vide order dated July 25, 1987 punishment of stoppage of one annual grade increment without cumulative effect was imposed. (iv) Vide order dated July 31, 1987 warning was given. (v) Vide order dated August 31, 1988 punishment of censure was given. 3. I have heard the rival submissions and weighed the record. 4. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in State of Gujarat v. Umedbhai M. Patel ( AIR 2001 SC 1109 ) indicated the broad principle's relating to compulsory retirement as under: (i) Whether the services of a public servant are no longer useful to the general administration, the officer can be compulsorily retired for the sake of public interest. (ii) Ordinarily, the order of compulsory retirement is not to be treated as a punishment coming under Article 311 of the Constitution. (iii) For better administration it is necessary to chop off dead wood, but the order of compulsory retirement can be passed after having due regard to the entire service record of the officer. (iv) Any adverse entries made in the confidential record shall be taken note of and be given due weight-age in passing such order. (v) Even un-communicated entries in the confidential record can also be taken into consideration. (vi) The order of compulsory retirement shall not be passed as a short cut to avoid departmental enquiry where such course is more desirable. (vii) If the officer is given a promotion despite adverse entries made in the confidential record, that is a fact in favour of the officer. (vi) The order of compulsory retirement shall not be passed as a short cut to avoid departmental enquiry where such course is more desirable. (vii) If the officer is given a promotion despite adverse entries made in the confidential record, that is a fact in favour of the officer. (viii) Compulsory retirement shall not be imposed as a punitive measure. (Emphasis supplied) 5. Coming to the facts of the instant case it may be noticed that the adverse entries made in the service record of the petitioner are minor in nature. These adverse entries relate to the period between 1973 to 1988 and the petitioner was given promotion to the post of Inspector in 1993 despite the said entries made in his service record. Thus in view of ratio indicated in State of Gujarat v. Umedbhai M. Patel (supra) this fact goes in favour of the petitioner and the impugned order of compulsory retirement of the petitioner cannot be sustained. 6. The writ petition accordingly succeeds and stands allowed. The impugned order dated June 12, 1998 is hereby quashed and the petitioner shall be deemed to be in continuous service as if the impugned order was never passed. There shall however be no order as to costs.Writ Petition Allowed. *******