Arijit Pasayat C.J.

judgment passed by learned Single Judge holding that respondent was entitled to pension with interest at the rate of 18 % per annum for the period during which pension was not paid is subject-matter of challenge.

2. A brief reference to the factual aspects would suffice. Respondent who was serving as Village Assistant retired from service with effect from 31.5.1990. Sub Judge, Thrissur, convicted respondent by judgment dated 26.10.1991 in C.C. No. 14 of 1991 and imposed sentence of imprisonment for a period of one year and a fine of Rs. 5000/-, with a default condition of simple imprisonment for three months in case of non-payment of fine. Respondent was arrested on 12.12.1994 and remained in custody till November, 1995. Respondent was paid pension till November, 1994. As he was convicted, minimum pension payable to him was stopped on the ground that he was undergoing imprisonment from 13.12.1994. Respondent preferred his pension bill from December, 1994. But no pension was in reality paid.

3. In the Original Petition, O.P. No. 12371 of 1996, stand of State Government was that because of his conviction, orders were to be passed whether pension was to be paid or not and the matter was awaiting orders of sanction for withholding payment of minimum pension. Learned Single Judge found that there was no pro vision specifically authorising withholding of pension. Accordingly direction was given to pay minimum pension and interest at the rate of 18% covering the period of non-payment.

4. According to learned counsel for the State, Part III of Kerala Service Rules, 1959 (in short'the K.S.R.') deals with "pension" and Rr. 2 and 3 read with R.135 make the respondent disentitled from receiving pension. Learned counsel Sri. Siby Mathew appearing for respondent submitted that these provisions, as referred to by learned counsel for the State, have no relevance.

5. For appreciating the rival submissions, it is necessary to extract the provisions as referred to.

R.2. (a) Future good conduct shall be an implied condition of every grant of a pension: The Government may, by order in writing, withhold or withdraw a pension or part thereof whether permanently or for a specified period, if the pensioner is convicted of a serious crime or is found guilty of grave misconduct.

(b) Where a pensioner is convicted of a serious crime by a Court of law action under clause (a) shall be taken in the light of the judgment of the court relating to such conviction.

(c) In a case not falling under clause (b), if the Government under clause (a) considers that the pensioner is prima facie guilty of grave misconduct, it shall, before passing an order under clause (a),

(i) Serve upon the pensioner a notice specifying the action proposed to be taken against him and the ground on which it is proposed to be taken and calling upon him to submit within fifteen days of the notice or such further time not exceeding fifteen days may be allowed, his explanation for such misconduct.

(ii) Take the explanation, if any, submitted by the pensioner under sub-clause (i) into consideration. (d) The Public Service Commission shall be consulted before final orders are passed.

Explanation:- In this rule, the expression "serious crime" includes a crime involving an offence under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923) and the expression "grave misconduct" includes the communication or disclosure of any secret official code or password or any sketch, plan, model, rule, note, document or information, such as is mentioned in S.5 of the said Act (which was obtained while holding office under the Government) so as to prejudicially affect the interest of the general public or the security of the State;

R.3. The Government reserve to themselves the right of withholding or withdrawing a pension or any part of it, whether permanently or for a specified period, and the right of ordering the recovery from a pension of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused to Govern