K. Vinod Chandran, J.

1. The appellant, a retired Upper Primary School Assistant (for short “UPSA”), seeks reckoning of the break in periods of her service as qualifying service for the purpose of fixation of retirement benefits.

2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the appellant was appointed as a teacher for various broken periods of 2 or 3 months between 1974 and 1981. On 1.6.1981, she was appointed regularly as UPSA in an aided school and she continued in service till her superannuation on 31.03.1998. Hence, she had about 17 years regular service and she had also worked for various periods, presumably in leave vacancies, in different aided schools between 1974 and 1981. The appellant claimed 17 years regular service and also reckoning of the 7 years in which she had spent various periods in service and sought for determining the period of interruptions in service also as qualifying service. While in total the appellant sought more than 24 years qualifying service, the respondents granted only 20 years qualifying service, computing only the period of actual service in aided schools before 1981.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant would urge before us that the denial of her claim was made on the ground that Government Decision No.8 under Rule 14E of Part III of Kerala Service Rules (“KSR” for short) provided for counting the period of break, only where the appointment before the break was not provisional or for limited period and the break was due to reduction of staff strength of the institution. This, according to the appellant, was a decision which was inserted with effect from 17.07.1984 by G.O. (P).344/84/Fin. It is the contention that the period of her actual service with intermittent breaks was before 1981 and the said decision would not be applicable to the case of the appellant. It is contended that Rule 31 of Part III KSR mandates interruptions in the service of an employee to be counted for pension, provided the same is not prohibited by the rules or by the competent authority. Note 3 of Rule 31 places such interruptions in service exceeding one year beyond the scope of Rule 31 and the appellant's interruptions at no point of time having exceeded one year, she is entitled to be granted qualifying service as sought for.

4. We extract Government Decision No.8 under Rule 14E and Rule 31 hereunder:

“8(i). The benefit of counting periods of break as per Note 3 below Rule 31, Part III, Kerala Service Rules will be allowed in cases where the appointment before the break was not provisional or for limited period and the break was due to reduction of staff strength of the institution.

(ii) In cases not covered by (i) above the actual period of service excluding the periods of break will be reckoned for qualifying service.

(iii) In cases covered by (i) above the certificate that termination of appointment was due to reduction of staff strength of the institution should be countersigned by the pension sanctioning authority or Head of the Departments”.

31. Interruptions.- Interruptions in the service of an employee will count for pension provided it is not specifically laid down in these rules or otherwise ordered by competent authority and recorded accordingly in the Service Book.

Note 3.- In cases where the period of an interruption in service exceeds one year, the benefit of reckoning the period of such interruption in service shall be restricted to the periods he was actually in service prior to the date of the interruption”.

Rule 31 is under Section III, with the heading “Suspension, Resignation and Interruption in Service”. The interruption in service contemplated in Rule 31 is that of regular service. The appellant undisputedly came into the regular service only on 1.6.1981. The appellant's claim is with respect to her service as a teacher in various aided schools on leave vacancies spanning over a period of seven years. Understood in the context of the interpretation placed on Rule 31; the app