CWP No.20243 of 2008.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.20243 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 16.11.2010 **** Avtar Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. Union Home Secretary, Incharge Freedom Fighter Division, New Delhi & Others . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 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? **** Present: Petitioner in person Mr. Ashwani Bansal, Advocate for UOI Mr. K.D.S. Sidhu, DAG Punjab ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner seeks a mandamus to direct the Union of India and the State of Punjab to grant him the ‘Freedom Fighter’s Pension’ under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme (in short, ‘the Pension Scheme’). (2). Shorn of the details, suffice it to mention that the petitioner is said to have participated in the Quit India Movement in the year 1942 at the call of the Father of the Nation. CWP No.20243 of 2008.doc - 2 – (3). As per the procedure contemplated in the Pension Scheme, the claim of the Freedom Fighter is required to be verified by the State Government through a fact-finding enquiry and if found genuine, the State Government not only grants the State-level pension but it also recommends to the Union of India for the granting of Central pension. (4). In the case in hand, it is not in dispute that the State of Punjab enquired into the petitioner’s claim under the direction of this Court and found it genuine and has accordingly granted him the ‘State pension’. (5). In its reply/affidavit, the State of Punjab has maintained that the petitioner’s claim was submitted to the Government of India along with relevant documents including the report of the Deputy Commissioner, Patiala on 09.11.2004 but the same was returned by the Government of India vide memo dated 09.01.2006 due to the alleged deficiency of documents, namely, the proof of age and certificate of imprisonment. (6). It appears that during the pendency of this writ petition, the State of Punjab has removed both the CWP No.20243 of 2008.doc - 3 – objections and after re-verifying the facts its learned counsel handed over the copies of the relevant documents to learned counsel for the Union of India as is evident from the following order dated 21.05.2010 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat of this Court before whom this matter was listed :- Learned counsel for Union of India, who is now in possession of all the requisite documents, prays for time for getting the matter for grant of pension settled. Adjourned to 09.07.2010. Sd/- (A.L. Bahri) President Sd/- (R.C. Kathuria) Member (7). The stalemate, however, still continues as the Union of India is insisting upon re-submission of the application by the petitioner in the prescribed format (Form-A) along with the necessary documents. The petitioner, on the other hand, contends and rightly so that the application in the prescribed format submitted by him is still lying with the Central Government and the deficiency, if any, stands removed by the State of Punjab as the necessary documents required by the Central CWP No.20243 of 2008.doc - 4 – Government have been admittedly handed over/given. (8). I have heard the petitioner in-person as well as learned counsel for the respondents at some length and perused the records. (9). In my considered view, it is wholly unreasonable and unfair on the part of the Union of India to insist for afresh application and then to make the petitioner to run from pillar to post, when in the given facts and circumstances, what is left out is merely a ministerial exercise which can be effectively performed by the authorities. It is not in dispute that the State of Punjab had recommended the petitioner’s case for Central pension in the year 2004 in the prescribed format (Form A) along with certain documents. The petitioner’s claim was however not accepted for want of ‘proof of his age’ and the ‘Certificate of Imprisonment’. Since the State of Punjab, on re-verification of the facts, has come to the conclusion that the petitioner did participate in the Quit India Movement (1942), there appears to be no reason for the State Government not to send the said report as the CWP No.20243 of 2008.doc - 5 – proof of ‘imprisonment’. Similarly, the petitioner is a permanent resident of District Patiala and the factum of his age can be easily got verified by the District Administration and a report to this effect can also be sent to the Central Government, if already not sent. (10). The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the following directions:- i. the State of Punjab is directed to send yet another set of attested documents including the Re-verification report submitted by the Deputy Commissioner, Patiala as a proof of the petitioner’s imprisonment during the 1942-Quit India Movement; ii. The proof of the petitioner’s age, if already obtained or otherwise, shall also be sent by the State of Punjab to the Central Government; iii. The above-stated documents shall be sent by the State Government, preferably through a ‘Special Messenger’, to the Central Government within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order; CWP No.20243 of 2008.doc - 6 – iv. On receipt of the documents, the Central Government is directed to take a decision on the basis of the original application form and the recommendations dated 09.11.2004 already sent by the State Government within a period of two months from the date of receipt of recommendations from the State Government. (11). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 16.11.2010 vishal shonkar (SURYA KANT) JUDGE