W.P.No. 2429 / 2001 18-03-2010 Shri R.S.Khare, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vikram Singh, counsel for the respondent No.1/Union of India.
Shri S.K.Kashyap, counsel for the respondent No.2/State.
The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the denial
of freedom fighters pension under the scheme framed by the Central
Government in the year 1972 and 1980.
The case of the petitioner before this Court is that the petitioner
was appointed and was working in the erstwhile Custom & Excise
Department but was removed from service on account of his activities
which were found to be anti Government in that particular point of time.
The petitioner submits that he has filed certificates of the then
Commissioner, Custom & Excise, dated 11-10-1972 and 14-10-1976 to
that effect as well as a certificate of the Collector, Tikamgarh dated
23-12-1963 to the effect that the petitioner was and is a political
sufferer. It is further stated that he had also produced certificates of the
Freedom Fighter Association, Tikamgarh dated 1-5-1985 in support of
his claim for freedom fighters pension under the scheme as well as
certificate of prominent freedom fighters and members of the
Parliament. It is stated that in spite of the aforesaid as the claim of the
petitioner was rejected by the respondent-authorities, the petitioner had
filed a writ petition before this Court which was registered as W.P.No.
4360/1995 and was disposed of by order dated 6-5-1998 by issuing the
following directions :-
“3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the
answering respondent disputing the contentions raised in the
petition. Mr. Gohil, learned senior standing counsel for the
respondent, Union of India, suggested that if the petitioner
makes a representation to the competent authority of the
Central Government along with documents the same shall
be considered after getting an inquiry conducted by the
agency of the State Government with regard to the
genuineness of the documents. Mr. Gohil assures that the
representation of the petitioner shall be disposed of within
six months from the date of receipt of representation.
4. Recording such assurance the petition
stands disposed of.”
It is stated that subsequent to the disposal of his petition the
petitioner filed a fresh representation claiming freedom fighters pension
on 25-9-1998 which has again been rejected by the respondent-Union
of India by the impugned order dated 4-11-1999 without calling for or
awaiting the report of the State Government. It is submitted that the
impugned order passed by the respondent-authorities dated 4-11-1999
apparently discloses non-application of mind by the authorities as well
as non-compliance of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.
4360/1995 dated 6-5-1998 and, therefore, the impugned order
deserves to be set aside.
The learned counsel for the Union of India submits that the
petitioner’s claim was initially rejected in the year 1973 on account of
the fact that his assertions regarding freedom fighting activities and
remaining underground were found to be unsubstantiated as the period
of petitioner’s remaining underground was less than six months which is
a pre-requisite under the scheme. It is further stated that the
respondent-authorities after scrutinizing the petitioner’s case have
rejected his claim for grant of freedom fighters pension and in such
circumstances no interference is called for in the impugned order.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and
perused the record.
From a perusal of the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid
writ petition and the impugned order passed by the respondent-
authorities it is apparent that the authorities have not complied with the
directions issued by this Court inasmuch as they have not waited for the
enquiry report in respect of the authenticity of the claim of the petitioner
from the State Government as is evident from a perusal of paragraph 1
of the impugned order and have again reiterated the same facts stating
that his claim has already been rejected previously. It is also clear that
the respondent-authorities have not applied their mind to the claim of
the petitioner based on his removal from service as a consequence of
which he was deprived of his livelihood on account of his involvement in
freedom fighters the activities which is another ground on which the
petitioner has claimed freedom fighters pension.
In view of the aforesaid the impugned order dated 4-11-1999
passed by the respondent-Union of India is set aside and the petition
filed by the petitioner is disposed of with direction to the respondent-
State to submit its report/recommendation on the application filed by the
petitioner after conducting an enquiry into the documents and
assertions made by the petitioner including his claim regarding removal
of service. Looking to the age of the petitioner which is now 91 years
the said exercise should be completed by the authorities of the State
within six weeks from the date of the supplying of the copy of the order
passed today. The authorities of the Union of India on the basis of the
recommendations and enquiry report submitted by the State shall take
a fresh decision on the application of the petitioner within a period of
one month thereafter.
With the aforesaid directions the petition filed by the petitioner
stands disposed of.
C.C. as per rules.
(R.S.Jha)
W.P.No. 2429 / 2001
18-03-2010
Shri R.S.Khare, counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Vikram Singh, counsel for the respondent No.1/Union of India.
Shri S.K.Kashyap, counsel for the respondent No.2/State.
The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the denial
of freedom fighters pension under the scheme framed by the Central
Government in the year 1972 and 1980.
The case of the petitioner before this Court is that the petitioner
was appointed and was working in the erstwhile Custom & Excise
Department but was removed from service on account of his activities
which were found to be anti Government in that particular point of time.
The petitioner submits that he has filed certificates of the then
Commissioner, Custom & Excise, dated 11-10-1972 and 14-10-1976 to
that effect as well as a certificate of the Collector, Tikamgarh dated
23-12-1963 to the effect that the petitioner was and is a political
sufferer. It is further stated that he had also produced certificates of the
Freedom Fighter Association, Tikamgarh dated 1-5-1985 in support of
his claim for freedom fighters pension under the scheme as well as
certificate of prominent freedom fighters and members of the
Parliament. It is stated that in spite of the aforesaid as the claim of the
petitioner was rejected by the respondent-authorities, the petitioner had
filed a writ petition before this Court which was registered as W.P.No.
4360/1995 and was disposed of by order dated 6-5-1998 by issuing the
following directions :-
“3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the
answering respondent disputing the contentions raised in the
petition. Mr. Gohil, learned senior standing counsel for the
respondent, Union of India, suggested that if the petitioner
makes a representation to the competent authority of the
Central Government along with documents the same shall
be considered after getting an inquiry conducted by the
agency of the State Government with regard to the
genuineness of the documents. Mr. Gohil assures that the
representation of the petitioner shall be disposed of within
six months from the date of receipt of representation.
4. Recording such assurance the petition
stands disposed of.”
It is stated that subsequent to the disposal of his petition the
petitioner filed a fresh representation claiming freedom fighters pension
on 25-9-1998 which has again been rejected by the respondent-Union
of India by the impugned order dated 4-11-1999 without calling for or
awaiting the report of the State Government. It is submitted that the
impugned order passed by the respondent-authorities dated 4-11-1999
apparently discloses non-application of mind by the authorities as well
as non-compliance of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.
4360/1995 dated 6-5-1998 and, therefore, the impugned order
deserves to be set aside.
The learned counsel for the Union of India submits that the
petitioner’s claim was initially rejected in the year 1973 on account of
the fact that his assertions regarding freedom fighting activities and
remaining underground were found to be unsubstantiated as the period
of petitioner’s remaining underground was less than six months which is
a pre-requisite under the scheme. It is further stated that the
respondent-authorities after scrutinizing the petitioner’s case have
rejected his claim for grant of freedom fighters pension and in such
circumstances no interference is called for in the impugned order.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and
perused the record.
From a perusal of the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid
writ petition and the impugned order passed by the respondent-
authorities it is apparent that the authorities have not complied with the
directions issued by this Court inasmuch as they have not waited for the
enquiry report in respect of the authenticity of the claim of the petitioner
from the State Government as is evident from a perusal of paragraph 1
of the impugned order and have again reiterated the same facts stating
that his claim has already been rejected previously. It is also clear that
the respondent-authorities have not applied their mind to the claim of
the petitioner based on his removal from service as a consequence of
which he was deprived of his livelihood on account of his involvement in
freedom fighters the activities which is another ground on which the
petitioner has claimed freedom fighters pension.
In view of the aforesaid the impugned order dated 4-11-1999
passed by the respondent-Union of India is set aside and the petition
filed by the petitioner is disposed of with direction to the respondent-
State to submit its report/recommendation on the application filed by the
petitioner after conducting an enquiry into the documents and
assertions made by the petitioner including his claim regarding removal
of service. Looking to the age of the petitioner which is now 91 years
the said exercise should be completed by the authorities of the State
within six weeks from the date of the supplying of the copy of the order
passed today. The authorities of the Union of India on the basis of the
recommendations and enquiry report submitted by the State shall take
a fresh decision on the application of the petitioner within a period of
one month thereafter.
With the aforesaid directions the petition filed by the petitioner
stands disposed of.
C.C. as per rules.
(R.S.Jha)
mct Judge