C.W.P. No.6986 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.6986 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision.28.09.2011 Kulwant Kaur wd/o late Sh. Balwant Singh, H.No.10/276, Shiv Colony, Near Kamal Public School, Rajpura, Distt. Patiala (Punjab) .....Petitioner-in-person Versus Union of India through Union Home Secretary Central Secretariat, North Block, New Delhi and another .....Respondents Present: None. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. There is no representation for the petitioner. On the date when the case was posted for hearing on 09.05.2011, the party appearing in person had made a request for adjournment in writing. The Court had adjourned the case sine die and directed it to be posted when an application was moved by the petitioner. There has been no such application but on subsequent date when the case was brought for hearing before Court on 21.09.2011, the party was again not present and it was adjourned today. 2. The petitioner claims pension as a widow to freedom fighter and the claim in the writ petition is that she must be paid pension under Swantantra Sainik Samman Scheme. She has given no details in the petition about period of imprisonment of her husband or how she is making the claim for entitlement. She says only that she must be C.W.P. No.6986 of 2011 (O&M) -2- entitled to pension in terms of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mukand Lal Bhandari Vs. Union of India and others 1993 Supp. (3) SCC 2. The entitlement of pension will be considered only on the basis of documentary evidence submitted and it is not possible to draw a parallel to the petitioner's entitlement by mere reference to a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court granting pension to yet another person. There is no basis for according to the petitioner relief that she is seeking for in the writ petition. 3. The writ petition is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 28, 2011 Pankaj*