1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.2495 OF 2000. Madhav S/o Sakharam Jondhale ... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra and another ... Respondents. ... Mr.S.K.Shinde, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.K.B.Choudhari, Addl.Govt. Pleader for the State. Mr.B.B.Kulkarni, advocate for the Respondent No. 1. ... CORAM : B.R.GAVAI AND : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,JJ. Date : 02.08.2010. ORAL ORDER (Per B.R.Gavai,J.) 1. By the present petition, the petitioner claims the pension under the Freedom Fighers' Scheme framed by the State Government. 2 2. The petitioner claims to have taken part in 1942 Quit India Movement and as such claims that he is entitled for pension under the Freedom Fighters Scheme. The claim of the petitioner is rejected on the ground that the petitioners case does not conform to the standard laid down in the Government Resolution dated 4.7.1995. 3. Mr.Shinde, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since petitioner's case was already recommended on 3.4.1982 by the District Gaurav Committee, it could not be rejected on the ground that it does not comply the requirements stipulated under the Government Resolution dated 4.7.1995. 4. Mr.Kulkarni, learned counsel on behalf of the Respondent submits that petitioner's case though recommended by the Gaurav Committee, was rejected prior to issuance of G.R.dated 4.7.1995 and since it was not pending, the petitioner is not entitled to Freedom Fighters' Pension. 3 5. From the perusal of the record and particularly the communication dated 3.4.1984, we find that the Collector has specifically stated that the case of the petitioner has been recommended by the District Gaurav Committee. The Full Bench of this Court in the case of "Tukaram Ramji Koli Vs. State of Maharashtra and others" 1999 (3) Mh.L.J.735, observed thus : "We may also clarify that it will not be proper for the Government to reject the applications processed by the Gaurav Samiti and pending before the Government for final decision solely on the ground that they do not comply with the requirements of G.R. dated 4th July, 1995 specifically when all these claims have been scrutinised by the Collector and recommended by the Gaurav Samiti on the basis of the guidelines/requirements that were in force at the relevant time." 6. We find that the claim of the 4 petitioner has been rejected on the ground that he does not conform the requirement under Government Resolution dated 4.7.1995. Since the case of the petitioner was scrutinised by the District Gaurav Samiti and the Collector and after complying the norms at the relevant time, was recommended, we find that in view of the aforesaid judgment of the Full Bench, the petitioner is entitled to the benefits under Freedom Fighters' pension . Rule, is, therefore, made absolute by directing the Respondents to make applicable pension under the Freedom Fighters' Scheme from the date of his first application. The arrears would be paid to the petitioner within a period of six (6) months. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) (B.R.GAVAI,J.) asp/office/wp249500