IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 25342 of 2004(P)
1. P.RAVEENDRAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. UNION OF INDIA,
... Respondent
2. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY,
3. STATE OF KERALA,
For Petitioner :SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
For Respondent :SRI.JOHN VARGHESE, ASSISTANT SG
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :06/10/2008
O R D E R
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) NO.25342 of 2004-P
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 6th day of October, 2008.
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the non-recommendation of his application for grant of
Swathanthratha Sainik Samman Pension by the third respondent, State of
Kerala, the petitioner has approached this court.
2. Shortly, the claim of the petitioner is that he was a Sepoy in the
Indian National Army (INA) raised by Netaji Subash Chandra Bose. He
joined the INA on 18.7.1943 and was deployed with 2/7th Guerilla
Regiment at Johar where he was captured as a war-prisoner by Allied
Forces and put in prison at Jithara Camp, Malaya from April 1945 to
December 1945. After independence, he returned to India in 1947. Ext.P1
is the certificate issued by the INA Committee certifying that the petitioner
was a member of the INA and a political sufferer. Ext.P2 is the
proceedings of the District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram sanctioning State
pension to the petitioner. Ext.P3 is the application for grant of SSS Pension.
3. Earlier, this court by Ext.P4 judgment directed the respondents to
consider and pass appropriate orders on his application. Accordingly,
Ext.P5 was passed. In Ext.P5, the reason for not recommending the
WPC 25342/2004 -2-
application is that the certificates produced by him are not sufficient and the
personal knowledge certificates are only in general nature. It is further
pointed out that the District Collector has not recommended the application.
4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the third respondent, it is
stated that for grant of Central pension, there should be evidence such as
imprisonment/detention certificate from the concerned jail authority,
District Magistrate or the State Government indicating the period of
sentence, etc. or in case records are not available, the non-availability of
records certificate from the concerned authorities along with two co-
prisoners’ certificate of competent certifiers. In this case, the petitioner has
failed to produce documents of the nature described above. Ext.P1 do not
show the details of the sufferings and the period of imprisonment.
5. Thus, it is a case where for want of proper records, the petitioner’s
claim could not be considered by the State Government for
recommendation. Even going by Ext.P1, the details of imprisonment are not
stated therein. At this distance of time, it may be difficult for the petitioner
to get the jail certificate from a foreign country also. He is unable to
produce the non-availability of records certificate also. But, in the absence
of such certificates the State Government cannot be found fault with in not
WPC 25342/2004 -3-
recommending the application.
In that view of the matter, I see no reason to interfere with Ext.P5.
The writ petition is therefore dismissed.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
kav/