JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner has filed present writ petition, against an order dated 09.08.2018 whereby his application for voluntary retirement has been rejected. He has also prayed for a direction to the respondents to confer all consequential retiral benefits, pursuant to acceptance of his application for voluntary retirement. 2. Mr. Akhilesh Rajpurohit, learned counsel for the petitioner informs that the present writ petition is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court delivered in the case of Dr Kalpana Singh v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (SBCWP No. 4526/2014) on 16.12.2014, wherein respondents were directed to accept the application for voluntary retirement, as the petitioner was notsuffering from any disqualification envisaged in Rule 50 of the Rajasthan Civil Services Pension Rules, 1996. The judgment in Dr. Kalpana Singhs case has also been followed in the case of Dr. Praveen Kumar Gehlot v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (SBCWP No. 2490/2016) decided on 23.05.2016. 3. Mr. Rajpurohit submits that as evident from the impugned communication dated 06.01.2017, no disqualification has been attributed to the petitioner by the respondents while rejecting his application for voluntary retirement. 4. Ms. Vandana Bhansali , learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute this position. 5. In view of above and in light of judgment in the case of Kalpana Singh (supra), the writ petition is allowed. The impugned decision dated 09.08.2018 is quashed and set aside. The petitioner shall stand retired with effect from 31.05.2019, all consequential retiral benefits in accordance with the Rules shall follow. 6. There is no requirement of depositing one months salary for the notice period, as the petitioner had already submitted his application as far back on 09.05.2018, which was wrongly rejected by respondents on 09.08.2018.