IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 12617 of 2010(B)
1. SMT.K.V.MADHAVI AMMA,W/O.LATE PULIKKOOL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF
3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF
For Petitioner :SRI.O.D.SIVADAS
For Respondent :SHRI.MATHEW SEBASTIAN, CGC
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :08/04/2010
O R D E R
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.12617 OF 2010
-----------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 8th DAY OF APRIL, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is the wife of late Shri Pulikkool Cheriya
Krishnan Nair, who was a freedom fighter, who participated in the
Kavumbai struggle. He was arrested on 26.12.1946 and
remanded to jail. The offences alleged against the petitioner’s
husband were under sections 147, 148 and 379 of IPC. The
criminal case initiated by the police was registered as
C.C.No.27/1947. The petitioner’s husband was an under trial
prisoner from 26.12.1946 and no bail was granted. Later, on
10.5.1947, the learned Magistrate convicted the petitioner’s
husband and after the conviction, he was transferred to the
Central Prison, Vellore and after the independence, he was
released on 2.11.1947. Exhibit P1 is the relevant extract of the
under trial prisoners and convict register maintained by the
Superintendent, Central Prison, Kannur relating to the petitioner’s
husband.
W.P.(C)No.12617/10 -2-
2. The Kavumbai struggle is one recgonised now for
grant of freedom struggle pension. Earlier, pension was
sanctioned to the petitioner’s husband as per Exhibit P3, which
was re-issued in the name of the petitioner as per Exhibit P4. It
was withdrawn by Exhibit P5 for the reason that Kavumbai
struggle has not been recognised as freedom struggle. After the
Kavumbai struggle was recognised as per Exhibit P8 proceedings
dated 20.1.1998, the petitioner has submitted an application for
grant of pension as per Exhibit P9. It is averred in the Writ
Petition that the District Collector and District Advisory
Committee considered the matter and forwarded the report to
the State Government recommending the application. Exhibit
P10 is the said communication whereby the State Government
has recommended the application of the petitioner for grant of
pension.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
so far no final orders have been passed in the matter. Heard the
W.P.(C)No.12617/10 -3-
learned Central Government Standing Counsel Shri Mathew
Sebastian.
4. Evidently, this is a case where pension was sanctioned
initially by Exhibit P3 to the husband of the petitioner and later to
the petitioner as per Exhibit P4. Therefore what is involved is
actually a restoration of the grant of pension as the cancellation
was only due to the fact that the Kavumbai struggle was not
recognised for grant of pension then as is clear from Exhibit P5.
In the light of the recognition of the said struggle for the purpose
of pension as per Exhibit P8 order, such an objection does not
survive also.
5. Therefore, there will be a direction to the first
respondent to consider the original of Exhibit P9 along with
Exhibits P3 and P4 which was forwarded by the State
Government along with the recommendation, jail certificates, etc.
and take appropriate decision and communicate the same to the
petitioner within a period of four months from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will forward a copy of
W.P.(C)No.12617/10 -4-
this Writ Petition along with a copy of this judgment for
compliance.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
JUDGE
dsn