High Court Kerala High Court

P.Balakrishnan (Died) vs Union Of India on 5 August, 2009

Kerala High Court
P.Balakrishnan (Died) vs Union Of India on 5 August, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RP.No. 657 of 2009(P)


1. P.BALAKRISHNAN (DIED),
                      ...  Petitioner
2. KUNJULAKSHMI,W/O.LATE P.BALAKRISHNAN,

                        Vs



1. UNION OF INDIA,REP.BY SECRETARY TO
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.DHARMADAN (SR.)

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :05/08/2009

 O R D E R
              C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J
                 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                      R.P. No.657 of 2009
                                    IN
                W.P.(C) NO.33744 OF 2004
              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
         Dated this the 5th day of August, 2009

                               O R D E R

The review petition is filed by the widow of the

petitioner stating that as on the date of disposal of the WPC

on 19.9.2008 the petitioner was no more in as much as he

died on 1.9.2007. Ofcourse, death of the petitioner was not

reported to the court when the case was heard and disposed

of. I heard counsel for the review petitioner and

Government Pleader who referred to the reason mentioned

in Ext.P5 in denying the benefit of SSS pension to the late

husband of the review petitioner. It is clear from Ext.P5

that the certificates produced by him in support of his claim

for suffering in the prison are issued by people who have not

suffered the minimum period of imprisonment making them

eligible to issue certificate. Further, the deceased husband

R.P. No.657 of 2009 IN
W.P.(C) NO.33744 OF 2004
2

of the review petitioner could not produce any evidence

about suffering in prison making him eligible for SSS

pension. I do not think any purpose will be served by

granting further opportunity to the review petitioner to

prove her late husband’s suffering in the prison in

connection with freedom strike. Facts which he could not

prove during his life time cannot be proved by the widow at

the distance of time. The sufferings in the prison was

obviously 60 years back and review petitioner does not

claim that she has any acceptable evidence about it. In

these circumstances, the review petition is devoid of any

merit and hence it is dismissed.

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
JUDGE

app/-