JUDGMENT : The petitioner, who is working as HSST (Physics) in an aided School, has filed this writ petition aggrieved by Exts.P3, P6 and P7. She gave birth to three babies on 24.11.2007. She was granted maternity leave from 20.11.2007 for a period of 135 days. On joining duty, she had applied for leave again, in view of the fact that she had to take care of three babies, who were having poor health and under weight. Simultaneously she submitted Ext.P1 application for leave without allowance for a period of three years from 9.6.2008 to 8.6.2011 based on medical certificate. The reason stated for leave was "to look after three new born babies and nursing them having under weight and poor health". The Regional Deputy Director forwarded the application along with the medical certificate Ext.P2, in which it was certified that her presence was extremely necessary near the three babies with under-weight and poor health for nurturing them at least for three years. But Government by Ext.P3 order granted her leave without allowance for private affairs under Rule 88, Part I of KSR on specific condition that the leave period will not count for any service benefits including pension and the same will be recorded in the service book. 2. Since her presence was again required on medical grounds, petitioner submitted another application, in continuation of the leave, for another period of two years from 9.6.2011 to 8.6.2013 as per Ext.P4 along with Ext.P5 medical certificate, certifying the requirement for leave. Government issued Ext.P6 order on similar lines as in Ext.P3 again granting her leave under Rule 88, Part I of KSR on private affairs and without any service benefits. 3. The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging these orders pointing out that under note to Rule 102 of Part I KSR regular leave in continuation of maternity leave is admissible to a female officer on production of a certificate to the effect that new born baby requires personal attention of the mother. 4. Respondents have filed counter affidavit. It is stated that the petitioner was granted the admissible maternity benefits for a period of 135 days and she is not entitled to leave in excess of what was granted. 4. Respondents have filed counter affidavit. It is stated that the petitioner was granted the admissible maternity benefits for a period of 135 days and she is not entitled to leave in excess of what was granted. It is stated that she was granted leave without allowance for a further period of five years in two spells on the basis of her application on condition that the leave without allowance will not be counted for any service benefits. 5. Heard both sides and considered the rival contentions. 6. The petitioner has submitted her application for leave along with medical certificate. In order to determine the claim raised by the petitioner, it is necessary to examine the provisions in Rule 102 of Part I KSR as well as other rules in KSR relating to admissibility of service benefits during the period of leave without allowance. Rule 102 of Part I KSR read as follows: 102 : Maternity leave may be combined with leave of any other kind but leave applied for in continuation of the former may be granted only if the request be supported by a Medical Certificate: Provided that no Medical Certificate shall be necessary for grant of any leave for a period not exceeding sixty days in continuation of maternity leave. Note.- Regular leave in continuation of maternity leave may also be granted to a female officer on her producing a Medical Certificate to the effect that the new born baby requires personal attention of the mother and her presence by the side of the baby is absolutely necessary. Explanation: The kinds of leave coming under regular leave mentioned in the Note are Earned Leave, Half Pay Leave, Leave not Due and leave Without Allowances only. Explanation provides for the kinds of leave coming under 'regular leave' mentioned in the Note i.e. earned leave, half pay leave, leave not due and leave without allowance. The next question to be examined is whether any service benefits are admissible when leave without allowance is granted. 7. Rule 33 of Part I KSR deals with conditions on which service counts for increments. The next question to be examined is whether any service benefits are admissible when leave without allowance is granted. 7. Rule 33 of Part I KSR deals with conditions on which service counts for increments. Rule 33(b)(2) reads as follows: Rule 33 (b)(2): All leave except leave without allowances taken otherwise than on medical certificate and service on deputation count for increments in the time-scale applicable to a post in which an officer was officiating at the time he proceeded on leave or deputation and would have continued to officiate but for his proceeding on leave or deputation. Thus under Rule 33(b)(2) all kinds of leave except leave without allowance taken otherwise than on medical certificate counts for increment. The 4th proviso to this Rule provides that 60 days period of LWA in continuation of maternity leave under Rule 102 counts for increments even without a medical certificate. Apart from that the 2nd proviso to Rule 33 (b)(2) provides that Government shall have power to direct that LWA shall be counted for increments, in any case in which they are satisfied that LWA was taken for any cause beyond the officer's control. 8. But Government passed the order Exts.P3 and P6 mechanically without even looking into any of these provisions. Petitioner's applications were supported by medical certificates. Therefore the action of Government in stipulating a condition that the period of leave granted to the petitioner shall not count for any service benefits is not only illegal but also arbitrary. 9. It is unfortunate that the Government shut their eyes not only to the factual circumstances under which the petitioner had to avail leave i.e. to take care of three babies, but also to the legal provisions when orders were passed on the petitioner's application. When the rule making authority found it fit to grant such benefits for taking care of one new born child (going by the normal circumstances) the petitioner was denied that benefit when she had to take care of the triplets. Even in other cases Government can grant the service benefits for those who availed leave without allowance for reasons beyond their control. 10. When the female officers are entitled to regular leave which includes leave without allowance also, Government ought to have granted leave without allowance without imposing the condition that it will not be counted for any service benefits. Even in other cases Government can grant the service benefits for those who availed leave without allowance for reasons beyond their control. 10. When the female officers are entitled to regular leave which includes leave without allowance also, Government ought to have granted leave without allowance without imposing the condition that it will not be counted for any service benefits. Imposing of such conditions defeat the very purpose and intent for which the provisions like Rule 102 is introduced in the statute. In the above circumstances, orders Exts.P3, P6 and P7, to the extent it directs that the said period will not count for any service benefits, are set aside. The said period shall count for all benefits as in the case of leave without allowance on medical grounds. There shall be a direction to the respondents to issue fresh orders on Exts.P1 and P4 applications revising Exts.P3 and P6 orders granting the petitioner leave without allowance with service benefits within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.