IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 31ST JULY 2009 / 9TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 19165 of 2006(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PUSHAKARI, W/O. LATE DOMINIC YOYHANNAN, KARUKAPARAMBIL, WARD IV, PUNNAPRA P.O., ALAPPUZHA-688 004. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.SATHISH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, FREEDOM FIGHTERS' DIVISION, LOK NAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI-110 003. ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR SRI.P.K.BABU, ACGSC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2009, THE COURT ON 31/07/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).19165/06 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1:- COPY OF APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR GRANT OF SSS PENSION TO THE RESPONDENT DT.27.3.98 EXT.P2:- COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT DT.31.3.98 SIGNED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.119/2/GENL/(1)/98-FF(SZ)DT.5.1.99 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT ALONG WITH COVER. EXT.P4:- COPY OF PPO.NO.MHAFF 0200142/9845 DT.11.3.02 ISSUED BY THE CETRAL PENSION ACCOUNTING OFFICE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE. EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT.2.9.05 PASSED BY this Court IN O.P.NO:8706/01 EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.28.10.05 SUBMITTED. EXT.P7:- COPY OF ORDER NO.119/3/2001/FF(SZ) DT.28.6.2006 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P8:- COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT IN WP(C).19614/04 BEFORE this Court A/W LETTER NO.52/CC/K/90/02-FF (SZ) DT.3.9.04 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL okb //True Copy// P.A. to Judge C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.19165 OF 2006 ------------------------------ Dated this the 31st day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. The petitioner is the widow of a veteran freedom fighter, Sri:Dominic Yohannan, who participated in “Punnapra- Vayalar movement” during the period of national freedom struggle and who was convicted and sentenced in a criminal case registered in connection with the said movement. The Government of India had recognized the “Punnapra-Vayalar movement” as part of a national freedom struggle, for the purpose of granting “Swatantratha Sainik Samman Pension”, with effect from 20.1.1998. Thereafter the petitioner submitted application for pension on 27.3.1998. Since her application was not disposed of, she along with two other similarly situated persons have approached this Court in O.P.8706/01. But during pendency of that writ petition, through Ext.P4 order, the petitioner was granted monthly pension, with effect from 26.12.2000. According to the petitioner the pension ought to have been granted with effect from 20.1.1998, the date on which the “Punnapra-Vayalar movement” was recognized as part of national freedom struggle, or at least with effect from 31.3.1998, i.e: the date on which her application was received by the W.P.(C).19165/06 2 respondents. 2. This Court while disposing of O.P:8706/01, in Ext.P5 judgment directed the respondent to look into the claim of the petitioner with respect to arrears, in accordance with law and to take a decision within a period of three months from receipt of the representation to be submitted by the petitioner along with copy of the judgment. In Ext.P5 Judgment this Court observed that, “Once the Government of India finds entitlement to pension for freedom fighters. I do not understand any justification for denying the arrears since the entitlement of pension is on the declaration that the petitioners are freedom fighters. After all such freedom fighters do not claim interest on arrears.” Ext.P6 is the representation submitted in this regard. But the petitioner's claim for arrears was denied through Ext.P7, stating that the application of the petitioner, forwarded by the State Government, was received by the respondents only on 26.12.2000 and hence the pension was granted with effect from that date only. 3. Petitioner had produced Ext.P8, which is a counter affidavit filed by the respondent in another writ petition, WP(C). No:19614/04. It is revealed that in an identical case for grant of dependent family pension with respect to participation in “Punnapra-Vayalar movement” the earlier order was reviewed W.P.(C).19165/06 3 and pension was sanctioned from an ante-date of 20.1.1998 onwards. Petitioner is seeking relief based on Ext.P8 and claims that an identical treatment need be ensured. 4. If the respondents had allowed pension in other cases with effect from 20.1.1998, i.e: from the date of recognition of “Punnpra-Vayalar movement” as part of national freedom struggle, I find no reason as to why similar benefit should not be granted in the case of petitioner also. In this regard learned counsel for the petitioner had brought to my notice a Division Bench decision of this Court in Union of India Vs. Radhamony (2005 (4) KLT 27). In that case this Court held that the eligibility for grant of pension is from the date of receipt of the original application. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mukund Lal Bhandari Vs. Union of India (1993 Supp.(3) SCC 2) this Court held that an earlier Division Bench decision in Krishnan Kutty Vs. Union of India (2003 (1) KLT 21) in which it is held that the entitlement is from 20.1.1998 i.e.:from the date of recognition of the movement as national freedom struggle, is not good law. It is held that, as observed in Mukund Lal Bhandari's case (cited supra) the entitlement is from the date on which the original application is received whether, the application is filed with or without the requisite evidence. W.P.(C).19165/06 4 5. In the case at hand the petitioner was allowed pension only from 26.12.2000 assigning the reason that the petitioner's application, forwarded by the State Government along with their report, was received by the respondent only on that date. But from Ext.P2 Postal Acknowledgement Card it is evident that the original application (Ext.P1) dt:27.3.1998 was received at the Office of the Deputy Secretary of the respondent on 31.3.1998. Therefore going by the directions contained in Mukund Lal Bhandari's case, which is followed in Radhamony's case, it is to be held that the petitioner is entitled to get pension w:e:f: 31.3.1998. In such circumstances the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to sanction “Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension” to the petitioner with effect from 31.3.1998 onwards, in modification of the earlier orders allowing such pension w:e:f: 26.12.2000. The arrears in this regard shall be disbursed to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the Judgment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb