IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5076 of 2009 DINA NATH SINGH . Versus THE STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS . ----------- 5/ 04/01/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and the Union of India. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 30.8.2007 issued by the District Magistrate, Patna asking him to show cause why recommendation for cancellation of his freedom fighter pension be not sent to the Union of India while simultaneously directing stoppage of family pension, for having obtained the same on basis of forged certificates. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that freedom fighter pension was granted on 5.3.1998 after examination of his eligibility on all aspects. Notwithstanding the same the Union of India stopped the pension in the year- 2002 in a suo motu action. After due enquiries, by a reasoned and speaking order dated 3.7.2003 the freedom fighter pension was restored along with all arrears. The petitioner has continued to receive the same till the issuance of the impugned order dated 30.8.2007. It is next submitted that though the respondent State can hold an enquiry and forward its recommendation to the Union of India for a final decision, the respondent State has no authority to withhold the pension in the meantime as that also amounts to a - 2 - punishment without a finding of guilt. Learned counsel for the State and the Union of India sought to persuade the Court that there was a controversy with regard to the date of birth of the petitioner and which required enquiry. Had the Union of India not stopped the pension of the petitioner in the year-2002 on issues of his age and then restored it by a reasoned and speaking order along with arrears after examination of issues on 3.7.2003, matters may have been entirely different. There has to be a finality to Government orders. But nonetheless, if any fraud is discovered, surely the respondents can reopen issues. Learned counsel for the intervener submits that it is possible that certain materials did not see the light of the day before the order dated 3.7.2003 was passed. In view of the order dated 3.7.2003 passed after application of mind restoring the pension along with arrears after an enquiry, the Court is satisfied that the impugned order dated 30.8.2007 in its present form stopping further pension pending enquiry is not sustainable. Without interfering with the impugned order dated 30.8.2007, insofar as it directs the petitioner to show cause, the Court only sets aside that part of the impugned order by which the pension of the petitioner has been stopped by the State Government pending the enquiry. - 3 - The petitioner is stated to have already filed his reply to the show cause notice. Let the District Magistrate, Patna forthwith forward the issue to the Union of India along with his recommendations within a maximum period of one month from the date of receipt/presentation of a copy of this order before him. The Union of India is then directed to pass final appropriate orders thereupon within a maximum period of one month from the receipt by it of the recommendation of the District Magistrate. On the expiry of the period of two months as aforesaid, if no final orders are passed by the respondents, the petitioner shall be entitled to receive his freedom fighter pension along with all arrears. Conversely, if orders adverse to the petitioner are passed, his remedies will lie afresh to challenge the same in accordance with law. The writ application stands allowed but only to the extent indicated. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)