M. RAMA JOIS, J. ( 1 ) THE short question that arises for my consideration in this writ petition presented by a retired Agricultural Income-tax officer is whether he was entitled to the benefit of the revision of pay scales under the Karnataka Civil services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1976, which came into force on, 1-1-1977 though, he had, retired from service voluntarily on 6-1-1976, because leave had been sanctioned to him till 4-7-1977. ( 2 ) THE petitioner having put in more than 30 years of service, exercised his right for voluntary retirement under note 1 to Rule 285 of the Karnataka civil Services Rules and gave notice to the Government about his desire to retired voluntarily with effect from 6-1-1976 and retired with effect from 6-1-1976. He also requested the Government to sanction leave at his credit. The above request of the petitioner was granted as per the notification dated 1st March 1976 (Ex. 'c' ). It reads as follows"the Government of Karnataka are pleased to sanction combined leave for 663 days with effect from 11-9- 1975 to 4-7-1977 (both days inclusive) to Sri A Mohammed Ghouse Agricultural income Tax Officer (Retired voluntarily with effect from 6. 1. 1976) consisting of - earned leave for 108 days from 11-9-1975 to 27-12-1975 Furlough, leave on average salary for 264 days from 28-12-1975 to 7-5-1976. Furlough leave on half pay for 158 days from 8-5-1976 to 12-10-1976 and half pay leave for 296 days from 13-10-1976 to 4-7-1977. The leave salary for the period from 6-1-1976 to 5-7-1977 shall be restricted to the limit prescribed under note IA below Rule 285 of k. C. S. Rs. 1958. "as can be seen from the above order leave was sanctioned to the petitioner commencing from 11-9-1975 upto 4-7-1977. ( 3 ) AFTER his retirement the petitioner made representation to the State Government claiming that he is entitled to the benefit of the revision of pay scales under the Karnataka Civil Service (Revised, Pay) Rules 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) which came into force on 1-1-1977 on the ground that on the said date he must be deemed to be in service because the leave had been sanctioned to him till 4-7-1977. The said request was rejected, by the state Government. Hence, the petitioner has presented this writ petition. The said request was rejected, by the state Government. Hence, the petitioner has presented this writ petition. ( 4 ) SRI U. L. Narayana Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, contended that in view of Note 2 to rule 95 of the Karnataka Civil Services rules, ihe period of leave so granted to the petitioner must be treated as extension and if it is so treated the petitioner must be deemed to be in service as on 1-1-1977 and consequently, he is entitled to the benefit of the revised pay rules. ( 5 ) THE stand taken on behalf of the government is that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of note 2 to Rule 95 of the Karnataka, civil Services Rules, as such benefit is available only to civil servants to whom leave was sanctioned under rule 110 of the Karnataka Civil services Rules. It is explained that the leave grunted to the petitioner was not under Rule 110 but under Note 1-A, of Rule 285 of the Karnataka Civil services Rules. ( 6 ) RULE 110 of the Karnataka Civil services Rules provides for the sanction of leave to a civil servant even after the date, of his retirement if the leave applied for by him before his retirement was refused on public grounds. Note 2 to Rule 95 provides that when leave is so granted beyond the date of retirement under Rule 110, such period shall be deemed to be extension of service. In the present case leave was not sanctioned to the petitioner under Rule 110 of the karnataka Civil Services Rules. As the petitioner expressed his desire to retire voluntarily with effect from 6-1-1976 and the said request was accepted by the Government under Note 1-A to Rule 285 of the Karnataka Civil services Rules, it was permissible for the competent authority to sanction leave due to him even after the date of voluntary retirement but not extending beyond the date ot superannuation. It is necessary to set out note 1-A to Rule 285 which empowers the Government to sanction leave in case of voluntary retirement. It is necessary to set out note 1-A to Rule 285 which empowers the Government to sanction leave in case of voluntary retirement. It reads:"a Government Servant who has given notice under Note 1 may be granted leave due and admissible to him, not exceeding beyond the date on which he attains the age of superannuation, even though such leave extends beyond the date on which he retires on the expiry of the notice, but the leave salary admissible in repsect of leave extending beyond the notice period shall be deducted by the amount of pension and pension equivalent of other retirement benefits. "from the order dated 1-3-1976 it is clear that leave was sanctioned to the petitioner under the above note. The second sentence in the above note makes it clear that the salary admissible in respect of leave extending beyond the notice period should be reduced by the amount of pension and pension equivalent of other retirement benefits. This portion of the rule clearly indicates that from the date of voluntary retirement the concerned official is entitled to pension and any amount payable to the civil servant consequent on the grant of leave should be reduced by the amount of pension to which he is entitled to under the Rules. The above Rule therefore excludes the possibility of treating the leave period as extension as in the case of leave sanctioned under Rule 110 of the Karnataka Civil Services rules read with Note 2 to Rule 95. Therefoee, the claim of the petitioner that he should be deemed to be in service as on 1-1-1977 is not tenable and consequently his claim for fixation of his pay under the Karnataka Civil services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1976 must also fail. ( 7 ) FOR the aforesaid reasons, I make the following order :- (i) Rule discharged. (ii) Writ Petition dismissed. (iii) No costs. --- *** --- .