Judgment :- 1. The short point involved in the petition is whether the break of I year 11 months and 15 days in the petitioner's war service and civil service could be condoned under GO. (P) 59/63/Fin. dated February 5, 1968 (Ext. P2). This in turn depends upon the question whether part time service constitutes civil service within Ext. P2. 2. The petitioner was in war service for a period of 11 years and 8 months from 23-12-1954 to 22-8-1966 when he was Physical Training Instructor in the Madras Regiment. After an interval of I year 11 months and 15 days he was appointed as a part time Physical Education Teacher in M.I A.U.P. School, Ponnani on August 7,1968. From June 1, 1971 he was appointed full time Physical Education Teacher when the post was converted into full time with effect from June 1, 1971 by GO. (M3) 56/71/5. Edn. dated 19-5-1971. By his proceedings No. A-1421/76 dated 22-3-1976 Ext. P1 the Assistant Educational Officer, Ponnani (the 5th respondent) ordered that the petitioner was entitled to count his war service for the purpose of calculating weightage for 1973 pay fixation. Subsequently by his proceedings No. D.Dis. 2494/76 dated 10-5-1976, the 5th respondent sanctioned higher scale of pay for the petitioner with effect from 1-10-1974 counting his war service. An increment was also sanctioned with effect from 1-10-1975. The Regional Deputy Director of Public Instruction, Kozhikode while checking the fixation of pay in the higher scale, took objection in the view that war service could be reckoned for fixation of pay in the higher scale only if the break between war and civil services does not exceed one year and that here the break exceeded that limit and no condonation had been obtained. On account of this objection the petitioner was denied further increments. The petitioner thereupon submitted a representation Ext. P3 dated 16-4-1977 to the Government requesting condonation of the delay. Subsequently at the request of the 5th respondent, the Headmaster of the petitioner's school also submitted a proposal Ext P4 for condonation of the break in the petitioner's service. On account of this objection the petitioner was denied further increments. The petitioner thereupon submitted a representation Ext. P3 dated 16-4-1977 to the Government requesting condonation of the delay. Subsequently at the request of the 5th respondent, the Headmaster of the petitioner's school also submitted a proposal Ext P4 for condonation of the break in the petitioner's service. The request for condonation met with no success as by the letter Ext P5 No. 80017/KI/79 dated 5-3-1980 the Government informed the petitioner that the maximum period of break between war and civil service that could be condoned for sanctioning higher grade was 3 years under the rules, that as he became a full time teacher only on 1-6-1971, the break in service came to nearly 5 years and that the delay could not be condoned and the part time service could not be reckoned for higher service. The petitioner states that consequent on Ext. P5 steps are being taken to his detriment, to refix his salary under the old scale depriving him of the benefit of the 1973 pay revision. He prays for quashing Ext. P5 as illegal and for other consequent directions, contending that it proceeds upon an illegal interpretation of Ext. P2. 3. There is no dispute about these facts. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State contends that part time service would not count for the purpose of sanctioning higher grade, that the break in service including part time service is nearly 5 years and that as under the rules the break exceeding 3 years could not be condoned Ext. P5 was unimpeachable. 4. Ext. P2 which was designed to give further concessions in counting war service for purpose of civil pension, so far as material, reads: "Accordingly Government are pleased to order that the concession of counting war service for pension under R.7 (b) Part III, Kerala Service Rules as clarified in G. O. (P) 253/671 dated 28-6-1967 will be extended for civil appointments arose on or after 1-1-1948 subject to the following particulars: 1. Breaks not exceeding one year between war service and civil service shall be treated as automatically condoned and 2. Breaks not exceeding three years may be condoned in exceptional cases under orders of Government. 3. Those orders will be deemed to have taken effect from 14-11-1966 ie., date of simplification of pension rules." 5. Breaks not exceeding one year between war service and civil service shall be treated as automatically condoned and 2. Breaks not exceeding three years may be condoned in exceptional cases under orders of Government. 3. Those orders will be deemed to have taken effect from 14-11-1966 ie., date of simplification of pension rules." 5. The petitioner does not obviously fall within clause (1) irrespective of whether his part time service as Physical Education Teacher from 7-8-1968 can be counted as civil service, because it was after a break of 1 year from his war service, to be exact 1 year H months and 15 days. He was made a full time Physical Education Teacher from 1-6-1971, which is more than 4 years after his war service. If however the civil service commenced on 7-8-1968 taking in the part-time service the break is less than 2 years and can be condoned by Government under clause (2) which provides that "Breaks not exceeding three years may be condoned in exceptional cases under orders of Government." The question that requires to be considered is whether 'civil service' takes in part-time service also or whether it is confined to full-time service alone. No definition of the term "civil service" in the relevant service rules was brought to my notice but that apart I have no doubt that part time service is also civil service. The antithesis in clauses (1) and (2) is between war service and civil service. The petitioner's service till 22-8-1966 was war service and from 7-8-68 it was civil service albeit part-time service. I could find no valid reason to exclude such service from the scope of civil service and being part-time alone is no such reason. 6. Art.310 and 311 of the Constitution refer to civil service of the Union and civil service of a State and cases have laid down the nature of the service that would constitute civil service. The State of Assam v. Kanak Chandra Dutta, AIR. 1967 S.C. 884, was concerned with the nature of the post held by a revenue functionary designated Mauzadar in Assam Valley. After examining the nature of his service and functions the Supreme Court held, agreeing with the High Court that the respondent filled a civil post and was entitled to the protection of Art.311(2). 1967 S.C. 884, was concerned with the nature of the post held by a revenue functionary designated Mauzadar in Assam Valley. After examining the nature of his service and functions the Supreme Court held, agreeing with the High Court that the respondent filled a civil post and was entitled to the protection of Art.311(2). The Supreme Court held that this was so notwithstanding that the post was remunerated by way of commission on collection of Government dues or (what is more relevant) that he was not a whole time employee, observing that a post outside the regularly constituted services may be a part-time employment or that the conditions of service of a Mauzadar enable him to engage in other activities. This is sufficient authority for the view expressed earlier that the petitioner's part-time service was also civil service. 7. As the petitioner's part-time service must also count as civil service, the break between his war service and civil service is less than 3 years and can be condoned by the Government. The view that the civil service began only on 1-6-1971 and the break was nearly 5 years and therefore outside the power of condonation on which Ext. P5 proceeds is wrong in law. I quash Ext. P5. The Government will dispose of the matter afresh according to law and in the light of the observations made above. The Original Petition is allowed in these terms. No costs. Allowed.