JUDGMENT 1. - The deputy commandant, Civil defence training center, Nagaur by the Order dated 15.09.2009 discharged the petitioner No.l from Home Guards on Completion of 25 years of service. The petitioners No.2 and 3 were also discharged from Home Guards on completion of 20 and 25 years of service respectively vide Orders dated 16.12.2009 and 07.09.2009. 2. While Challenging the orders aforesaid, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per rule 9 of the Rajasthan Home Guards Rules, 1962 (for short the Rules of 1962 hereinafter), a person may remain as a member of Home Guards until he attains the age of 55 years and the petitioner have yet not attained the age of 55 years, therefore, their discharged under Order impugned is bad. 3. I do not find any merit in the arguments advanced. 4. The Home Guards created under the Rajasthan Home Guards Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act of 1963' hereinafter) is a voluntary organisation. Its members are public servants, but not the civil servants. The service with Home Guards is a voluntary service as per Section 3 of the Act of 1963 and no one can claim appointment to Home Guards as a matter of right. All the appointment to Home Guards are term appointment and such voluntary appointment may be terminated at any time on or before the expiry of the term prescribed for employment. In the present case a decision was taken by Home Guards organisation for not continuing any person as home guard beyond the term of 15 years and in compliance of that the petitioners were discharged who as a matter of fact have already completed 20-25 years of membership. The decision so taken is in administrative exigency and no right of the petitioner in any manner is infringed. The Order impugned is not at all unjust or arbitrary. 5. The petition for writ is dismissed accordingly.Writ Petition Dismissed. *******