Gopinathan, J.

1. The respondent herein while working as Junior Accountant in Sub Treasury Office, Kasargod was caught red handed by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau when the respondent accepted bribe from the Principal of a parallel college on 7-7-1997 for numbering a bunch of chalan forms presented before the Treasury for remittance of the examination fees of the students. The matter was brought to the notice of the authorities and by Ext.P1 order dated 10-12-1997 issued by the District Treasury Officer, Kasargod, suspended the respondent from service with effect from 8-12-1997 pending enquiry in connection with report of acceptance of bribe. The Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Kasargod after due investigation, filed charge sheet against the respondent before the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kozhikode alleging offences under Sec.7 and 13(1) (d) r/w.Sec.13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

2. The Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kozhikode after due trial found the respondent guilty for the above offences, convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.5,000/-each for offences under Sec.7 and Sec.13(1)(d) r/w.Sec.13(2)of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Consequently, on 17-12-2001 by Ext.P2 order, the District Treasury Officer, Kasargod terminated the service of the respondent with effect from the date of suspension. In Crl.Appeal No.285/2000, this Court by Ext.P3 judgment dated 15-7-2005 acquitted the respondent giving benefit of doubt. On representation from the respondent, by Ext.P4 dated 5-12-2005, the respondent was reinstated in service. Accordingly, the respondent rejoined service with effect from 14-12-2005.

3. The respondent represented the Government by letter dated 4-2-006, responding to which Ext.P5 order dated 18-3-2006 was issued by the Principal Secretary, Finance, whereby the period of absence from the duty ie. 8-12-1997 to 14-12-2005 was regularized as duty except forpay and allowances and for accrual of earned leave for the period to be reduced to the subsistence allowance admissible under Rule 55 Part I KSR. Being not satisfied, the respondent made Ext.P6 representation dated 15-5-2006 stating that since he was acquitted the case is to be settled under Rule 56A(3) of Part I KSR and for disbursing the full salary and other allowances. The first appellant considered the matter and rejected Ext.P6 and intimated the same to the 2nd appellant, who in turn sent Ext.P7 communication dated 22-7-2006 to the 3rd appellant. Ext.P7 was communicated to the respondent.

4. Assailing Exts.P5 and P7, the respondent filed WP (C).No.26754/2006. The learned single Judge by the impugned judgment dated 12-1-2009 allowed the writ petition by holding that this is a case coming under clause (a) and (b) of the second proviso to Rule 18 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeals) Rules and directed the appellants to disburse full salary and other benefits during the period of absence. Assailing the above judgment the respondents have come up in appeal.

5. We heard the learned Special Government Pleader Sri.N.Manoj Kumar and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

6. According to the learned Spl.Government Pleader, the absence of duty in this case comes under Rule 58 and to be dealt under Rule 56B of the Kerala Service Rules. In contra, the learned counsel for the respondent would argue that since no disciplinary proceedings was initiated, the second proviso to Rule 18 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeals) Rules alone is applicable. For easy reference, we quote the rules. Rule 18 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeals) Rules reads as follows:-

"18. Special procedure in certain cases:-

Notwithstanding anything contained in rules 15, 16 and 17,

(i) Where a penalty is imposed on a Government servant on the ground of conduct which had led to