IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2010 / 1ST MAGHA 1931 WA.No. 71 of 2010 ------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.27858/2008 Dated 23/10/2009 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------ PUNNAKKAN NARAYANAN, S/O. LATE AMBU, AGED 83 YEARS, PUNNAKKAN HOUSE, AZHIKKAL.P.O., KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAMKUMAR NAMBIAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL ADMINSTRATION (F.F.F.-B) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KANNUR. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No.71 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 23rd October, 2009 dismissing the writ petition, the writ petitioner is before this Court in the present writ appeal. 2. The appellant octogenarian is fighting for benefits under the Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme. The present writ petition is the 6th attempt made by him before this Court for a direction to the Government to give him freedom fighter's pension. Right from the year 1985 when he approached this Court for the first time till date the sixth time, noting the fact that the appellant has no enough material with him or produced, even though upheld the orders passed by the authorities, in order to give him opportunities, directed him to approach the authorities again W.A. No.71 of 2010 2 and again and find out if any relief can be granted to him, and inspite of those opportunities and failing in all his attempts, may be genuine, he was not given the relief. Ultimately, in the present writ petition, the learned Single Judge deemed it proper to give a quietus and more importantly peace to the petitioner himself by closing all the considerations unnecessarily. 3. No doubt, everyone respects the freedom fighters and their struggle and sacrifice for getting India free. As even contended by the appellant himself, he is not fighting for monetary benefits, but for recognition as a freedom fighter and as such he is entitled to the relief claimed. As the learned Single Judge has rightly noted, the participation of the petitioner during the freedom struggle is well recognised by the State and it is only the latter recognition of the Union of India which is being again sought. In the absence of any acceptable material before the authorities, inspite of giving repeated opportunities to the W.A. No.71 of 2010 3 appellant, in our view, the learned Single Judge was justified in declining to grant relief to the appellant not for the first time and as observed earlier for the sixth time. We find that the octogenarian should now rest with a peaceful life instead of running around the court for the benefit of the Pension Scheme which is again not allowed. We find no merit in the writ appeal and the same is dismissed. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge vns