IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 9931 of 2004(G)
1. K. BHASKARA PILLAI, LAKSHMI BHAVAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
For Petitioner :SRI.T.K.ANANDA PADMANABHAN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :24/07/2008
O R D E R
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) NO.9931 of 2004-G
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 24th day of July , 2008.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a freedom fighter now aged 89 years. He was an
applicant for grant of pension under the State Freedom Fighter’s Pension
Scheme. The application was initially rejected by the District Collector as
per Ext.P1. Then he filed an appeal before the Government and the
Government rejected the same for want of acceptable documentary
evidence, as per Ext.P3. Thereafter, he filed a fresh representation, Ext.P4
along with 11 documents. The petitioner has produced the co-prisoners’
certificates from Shri K.P. Parameswaran Nair, Shri N.S. Krishna Pillai,
Shri N. Kunjukrishnan and Shri Jamal Labba who are prominent freedom
fighters. But still, his application was rejected by Ext.P5 mainly for the
reason that the jail records of Shri Jamal Labba has not been produced. It is
also stated that the District Collector has not recommended his application.
Therefore, he was directed to produce any acceptable materials. Again, the
petitioner filed Ext.P6 representation. By Ext.P7, that representation was
also rejected on the ground that the jail records of the certifiers have not
been produced and that the District Collector has not recommended the
WPC 9931/2004 -2-
application. It is also stated that he was not a major at the time of his
participation in the freedom movement.
2. The petitioner has filed a detailed reply affidavit and an
application producing some more documents. Ext.P8(1) is the copy of the
application. Ext.P8(3) is the true extract of the convict register relating to
Shri Jamal Labba and Ext.P8(4) is the N.A.R.C. from the criminal court.
Ext.P8(6) is the copy of the judgment relating to Shri Parameswaran Nair
showing that he was convicted. Ext.P9 is the minutes of the Advisory
Committee of the District Collector, Trivandrum dated 30.9.2002. Para 5
shows that the Advisory Committee recommended his application, but the
Collector did not recommend it on the ground that he was not a major at the
relevant time.
3. In the light of the fact that the jail records and other documents are
available, the stand taken in Exts.P5 and P7 requires reconsideration. The
matter will have to be reconsidered by the authorities in the light of the
documents mentioned above. But one aspect has to be considered. The
finding that since the applicant was not a major, his claim cannot be
considered, cannot be sustained. As far as the freedom movement is
concerned, it is well-known that people of all walks of life including
students, teachers and others have actively participated in the movement
WPC 9931/2004 -3-
and have suffered imprisonment, etc. This court and Apex Court have held
in various cases also that merely because the applicant was not a major, the
claim cannot be rejected. The Apex Court in Gurdial Singh v. Union of
India and others {(2001) 8 SCC 8} has held that the applications of the
freedom fighters for pension should be considered liberally. In an earlier
case, in Mukundlal Bhandari v. Union of India and others (AIR 1993 SC
2127), while considering the case of freedom fighters, it was held by the
Apex Court that a technical approach should not be taken and the matter has
to be considered keeping in view the object of the scheme. As seen above,
in this case the Advisory Committee has recommended the case of the
petitioner, but the Collector did not recommend it on the ground that he was
only a minor as revealed from Ext.P9. That reason cannot be sustained.
Further, learned counsel for the petitioner points out that at any rate, he was
of the age 18 at that time.
4. Therefore, there will be a direction to the District Collector to
recommend the application of the petitioner for sanction of pension in
accordance with the decision of the Advisory Committee as reflected in
Ext.P9. The same shall be done within a period of three weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Thereafter, the first respondent
WPC 9931/2004 -4-
shall re-consider the matter and take a decision on the merits, after
considering the various certificates including the jail certificates of Shri
Jamal Labba and other certificates produced by the petitioner. Petitioner
shall produce Exts.P8 and P9 along with a copy of this judgment before the
District Collector for appropriate action and transmission to Government.
The Government shall pass final orders within a period of two months from
the date of receipt of recommendation from the District Collector. Since it
is reported that the petitioner is aged 89 already, expeditious steps shall be
taken in the matter by the authorities concerned to finalise the same within
the time limit provided in this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
kav/