IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.20339 of 2004 Between: M.Lakshmi Narasimha Rao, S/o.Muralidhar Rao, 73 years, Gangavaram Village, Sathupally Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1.The Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, Lok Nayak Bhavan, Khan Market, New Delhi. .....RESPONDENT O R D E R : In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has questioned proceedings in F.No.112/4376/97-FF(HC)-C, dated 10-09- 2003, issued by the respondent herein rejecting the petitioner’s claim for grant of Freedom Fighters Pension under the Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 (for short ‘the Scheme’) on the ground that he was under aged (14 years 4 months 27 days as on 01-03-1947) at the time of Hyderabad Liberation Movement. Petitioner filed an application for grant of freedom fighters pension under the Scheme, on 04-08-1987, mentioning his age as 55 years. The said application was forwarded for verification to the District Collector, Khammam, who conducted an enquiry and vide proceedings in Rc.No.C6/2117/112/4376/97, dated 05-03-2003, recommended the Secretary to State Government, Revenue Department, to take further action. A verification sheet and the documents filed by the petitioner in support of his claim were enclosed to the said proceedings. In the verification sheet annexed thereto, date of birth of the petitioner was mentioned as 12th January, 1931. The Secretary to State Government, Revenue Department, forwarded the said proceedings along with the verification sheet and the documents enclosed therein, to the respondent-Deputy Secretary to Government of India, M.O.H.A., (FF.Division) New Delhi, recommending the petitioner’s case for grant of Central Freedom Fighters Pension under the Scheme. But, the respondent, took into account the age of the petitioner mentioned in his application form, and rejected his claim on the ground that he is underaged at the time of Hyderabad Liberation Movement and as such, he is not eligible for grant of pension under the Scheme. It is the grievance of the petitioner that his date of birth is 12th January, 1931, and that he was above 15 years as on 01-03-1947 and that the same was mentioned in the verification sheet forwarded by the District Collector, Khammam, along with his proceedings, dated 05-03-2003, but the respondent rejected his claim on untenable grounds. It is submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner mentioned his approximate age in his application form, and in view of his correct date of birth i.e., 12-1-1931, as evident from the verification sheet issued by the District Collector, the respondent ought to have accepted his claim for grant of freedom fighters pension. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent, while generally denying the various allegations of the petitioner, in paragraph 6, it is stated as under: ‘That as per the guidelines dated 04-12-2002, a person who was minor, i.e., below 15 years of age at the time of commencement of Hyderabad Liberation Movement in March, 1947 is not eligible for grant of samman pension. Thus, an applicant born after 1.3.1932 is not eligible for grant of pension being a minor. That the petitioner in his application submitted earlier on 4.8.1987 had indicated his age as 55 years. On that basis, his date of birth was calculated as 4.8.1932 and he was found under-aged i.e., below 15 years of age as on 1.3.1947. As such it was not found possible to sanction him Samman pension. Further, in another place, he himself indicated his date of birth as 12.3.1933. On that basis also, he was also a minor in March’ 1947. A copy of his application, dated 4.8.1987 is enclosed herewith as Annexure R-I.’ Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. The petitioner has filed an application on 4th August, 1987 and in Column 3 of the said application, he mentioned his age as 55 years. He has also placed on record proceedings, dated 05-03-2003, issued by the District Collector, Khammam, requesting the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, to take further action on his claim. In the verification sheet enclosed therein, the date of birth of the petitioner was mentioned as 12th January, 1931. The Nodal Officer also, after verification, stated that the records submitted by the petitioner were found to be genuine. In addition to the same, the petitioner also filed an extract of Register of Births for the year 1931 in Chintalpudi Village, Chintalapudi Taluq, West Godavari District, maintained under the relevant provisions of law, and issued by the Superintendent Mandal Revenue Officer, Chintalapudi, showing his date of birth as 12-1-1931. During pendency of this Writ Petition, letter No.27062/FF1/2008, dated 13-06-2008, was issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government addressed to the Joint Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs (FF Division), New Delhi, and it reads as under: ‘Based on the above verification report received from the Collector, Khammam District along with the certificates, in respect of Sri Madiraju Lakshminarasimha Rao, S/o.Muralidhar Rao, R/o.Bethupalli Gangaram (v), Sathupalli (M), Khammam District, Andhra Pradesh, the case is hereby recommended by this State Government for sanction of Freedom Fighter Pension to Sri Madiraju Lakshminarasimha Rao, S/o.Late Madiraju Muralidhar Rao, R/o.Bethupally Gangaram (V), Sathupalli (M), Khammam Dist. Under SSSPS, 1980, (Category I, vide GOI No. D.O.Lr.No.112/Misc/5/98-FF (HC) dt.27/28-1-1999) the following documents enclosed in original.’ From the aforesaid report, it is clear that on enquiry, claim of the petitioner was found to be genuine. The only ground on which the respondent rejected the petitioner’s claim appears to be that he mentioned his age as 55 years in the application form. Without verifying the further documents, the respondent has merely calculated 55 years from the date of filing of application i.e., 4th August, 1987 and came to the conclusion that date of birth of the petitioner is 4th August, 1932 and that he was below 15 years at the time of Hyderabad Liberation Movement. When it is categorically mentioned in the verification report that the petitioner’s date of birth is 12-1-1931, there is no reason for the respondent for not taking the said date into consideration while considering the petitioner’s claim. In any event, the claim of the petitioner is substantiated by the documents filed in support thereof i.e., extract of the Register of Births for the year 1931, and the verification sheet annexed to the proceedings of the District Collector. Therefore, I feel that it is evidently a fit case for reconsideration of the claim of the petitioner. For the aforesaid reasons, proceedings, dated 10-09-2003, is set aside with a direction to the respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner afresh in the light of letter No.27062/FF1/2008, dated 13-06-2008, issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government and also the date of birth entry made by the District Collector in verification sheet annexed to proceedings, dated 05-03-2003. It is open for the petitioner also to file a certified copy of the extract of the Register of births for the relevant year maintained under the relevant provisions of law. On such document being filed, respondent shall look into the same before taking a decision on the claim of the petitioner for grant of freedom fighters pension. Inasmuch as the Writ Petition is filed in the year 2004 and as the petitioner was aged 73 years by the time of filing of the Writ Petition, respondent is directed to reconsider his claim and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision to the petitioner. Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. ___________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J) 21st August, 2009 Note: Furnish CC in one week. B/o lur