Kerala High Court
K. Subhadra vs Union Of India on 1 June, 2011
Author: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 34813 of 2005(T)
1. K. SUBHADRA, W/O. LATE V.SUKUMARAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. UNION OF INDIA,
... Respondent
2. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
For Petitioner :SRI.LIJU. M.P
For Respondent :SRI.JOBY CYRIAC, CGC
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :01/06/2011
O R D E R
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No. 34813 OF 2005
------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF JUNE, 2011
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner is the widow of a freedom fighter having served Indian National Army (INA) for nearly 7 months from 10-04- 1944. In the course of the service of the deceased as above, he suffered imprisonment for nearly 7 months from August 1945 to March 1946. The factual position in this regard is sought to be asserted by the petitioner with reference to Ext.P1 certificate issued by the Kerala Ex-I.N.A Association; Exhibit P2 certificate issued by a co-prisoner and also Ext.P12 certificate issued by All India I.N.A Committee with regard to the concerned aspects mentioned therein. The case of the petitioner is that the deceased husband of the petitioner had made an application (Ext.P3) as early as in 1974 for granting pension by the Central Government under the Freedom Fighters Scheme. Since the same was not considered for quite long, after the demise of the husband, the petitioner took up the matter by filing Ext.P5 application dated 03-01-1985 and produced certain documents. While so, when the petitioner was given pension payable in respect of Freedom Fighter by the State, as per Ext.P4 order dated 31-07-1984, the petitioner requested to transpose the W.P (C) No.34813/2005 -2- application already preferred by the late husband and to consider her eligibility for the benefit.
2. Since nothing was heard, the petitioner preferred Ext.P6 reminder dated 23-05-1992 which was sent by registered post and thereafter approached this Court by filing OP No.21252/1999 for appropriate reliefs, which culminated in Ext.P8 verdict dated 18-08-1999 directing the 2nd respondent to consider the application and pass appropriate orders. However, without honouring the verdict in right spirit and perspective, the 2nd respondent passed Ext.P9 dated 27-10-1999 rejecting the application, for the reason that the application was not accompanied by a proper Co-prisoner's Certificate (CPC). Met with the situation, the petitioner preferred Ext.P10 application on 28-06-2005 pointing out the actual facts and figures including as to forwarding of the relevant certificates. Since the same did not turn to be fruitful, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the above writ petition.
3. A counter affidavit has been filed from the part of the respondents contending the salient features of the Scheme and as to non-compliance of the of the norms on the part of the petitioner. The learned standing counsel appearing for the W.P (C) No.34813/2005 -3- respondents submits that the Scheme is specific and so far as the terms of the Scheme are not under challenge, the contention of the petitioner that Ext.P2 certificate issued by a Co-prisoner who had undergone imprisonment for a lesser term than 'one year' is not liable to be accepted and no relief is liable to be extented to the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext.P2 certificate has been issued by a person who had undergone imprisonment for 7 months as in the case of the petitioner, as the co-prisoner, who infact was granted pension by the Respondents under the very same Scheme and was also awarded 'Thamrapathra'. This by itself shows the discriminatory attitude being followed by the respondents in the matter of granting benefits to the deserving persons which is sought to be intercepted, relying on the decision in Devaki K. V. Union of India and others reported in 2010 (3) KHC 823. This Court is aware that Freedom Fighter's Pension granted by the State is not a reason for granting pension under the Central Scheme automatically. On going through the contents of the Scheme extracted by the respondents in their counter affidavit, there is no dispute regarding the eligibility of the petitioner to get the W.P (C) No.34813/2005 -4- benefit under the Scheme (if the Freedom Fighter has undergone imprisonment for 6 months) subject to the satisfaction of the terms therein. It is to be ascertained whether the person concerned is a 'Freedom Fighter', on the basis of the evidence as stipulated; either by way of primary evidence or even by secondary evidence.
5. Exhibit P2 certificate has been issued by a co- prisoner, who is a person having undergone imprisonment for less than the term of one year. No explanation is there, as to how such a person himself was granted the pension under the Scheme, having suffered only 7 months imprisonment and was honoured by giving 'Thamrapathra'. That apart, similar issue had come up for consideration before this Court earlier and a positive declaration has been made as per the judgment cited supra.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the petitioner as per the verdict in 2010 (3) KHC 823 and that the petitioner is entitled to get pension by virtue of the sufferings of her husband who was a 'Freedom Fighter'. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to grant pension W.P (C) No.34813/2005 -5- under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme to the petitioner, being the widow of the freedom fighter concerned. Appropriate orders shall be passed by the respondents, extending the benefit to the petitioner and shall the due amount be disbursed within '3 months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Writ Petition is allowed to the said extent. No costs.
Sd/-
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
AMG True copy P.A to Judge