IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.944 of 2009 5 22.2.2010 Sujan Devi, Wife of Late Tribeni Hazari, resident of village + Post – Dumaria Buzurg, P.S. Parbatta, District – Khagaria ( Petitioner in CWJC No.411/05) ...... Appellant VERSUS 1. The Union of India, represented through the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi 2. The Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, Freedom Fighter Pension Section, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi 3. The Under Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, Freedom Fighter Pension Section, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi 4. The State of Bihar, represented through the Director- cum- Joint Secretary, Home (Special) Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 5. The Joint Director, Directorate of Freedom Fighter Pension, Home (Special) Department, Govt. of Bihar, Pana 6. The District Magistrate, Khagaria (Respondents in CWJC No.411/05) ..... Respondents ------- For the Appellant : Mr Vivekanand Pd. Singh, Advocate For Union of India : Mr Gopesh Kumar, Advocate,Central Government counsel For State of Bihar : Mr Awadhesh Pandey, GA 7 -------- Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel appearing for the Union of India. The writ petition filed by husband of the 2 appellant, bearing CWJC No.411 of 2005 has been dismissed by the order under appeal passed by learned single Judge of this Court on 30.1.2009. The discussions made by the Writ Court clearly show that the Court did not appreciate the explanation offered on behalf of the petitioner for not challenging an order dated 30.6.1986 by which writ petitioner’s claim for Freedom Fighter Pension has been rejected. We have given thought to the entire matter and we are in agreement with the Writ Court that although a passing reference to order dated 30.6.1986 was made in paragraph 9 of the writ petition and that order was annexed as Annexure-6, clearly prayer was not made to interfere with that order with a view to avoid explanation for such unusual delay. In our view, the Court rightly refused to exercise writ jurisdiction when writ petition was filed after 19 years trying to revive a claim for Freedom Fighter Pension as a fresh claim when in fact, it was a stale claim already rejected in 1986. In course of hearing of this appeal on the earlier date, learned counsel for the State of Bihar disclosed to us that the relevant records were searched and unearthed 3 leading to a further disclosure that in fact, writ petitioner’s claim for Freedom Fighter Pension had been rejected by the competent authority of the Central Government through a letter dated 6th June, 1983 also. A copy of that letter has been annexed as Annexure-B to the counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the letter or the later rejection in 1986 do not have any importance because a claimant for Freedom Fighter Pension has unlimited right to continue repeating his claim and so long as such claim remains pending, there can be no question of delay in approaching the Writ Court. We reject such submission as one without merits. Now, from the perusal of order dated 6th June, 1983 it is abundantly clearly that the writ petitioner resorted to deliberate suppression of material facts with a view to mislead this Court in exercise of extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Such deliberate act cannot be condoned. Hence, we proposed to impose a costs of Rs.5,000/- on the appellant but considering the submission that present appellant is a widow and the original writ petitioner is no more, we do 4 not impose costs upon the present appellant. The appeal shall stand dismissed. (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (C. M. Prasad, J.) sk