CWP No.12457 of 2010 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.12457 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 24.08.2011 Gurbachan Singh son of Kandhara Singh, VPO Gulzarpura @ Dhaura Focal Point, Samana, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala, Punjab. ... Petitioner Versus Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure, Central Pension Accounting Office, Trikoot-II, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. None for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ***** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? NO 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? NO 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? NO K. KANNAN, J. (Oral) 1. The petition is for release of the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension to the petitioner on the ground that he had been receiving pension all along through the third respondent-Bank till it was stopped in the year 2003. The stoppage is purported to have been on the basis of a communication from the Union of India on 26.06.2003 that the Freedom Fighters Pension to the petitioner/ holder of PPO No.MHAFF9902377 was to be stopped and this was affirmed again on 06.10.2003. However, subsequently 15.09.2009, the Union CWP No.12457 of 2010 (O&M) [2] of India has sent a communication to the respondent-Bank with a copy marked to the petitioner's counsel that the office had not issued any letter of stoppage of pension to Gurbachan Singh as per the office record. The counsel for the respondent-Bank states that the stoppage of pension had been made only on account of the earlier communication received in the year 2003 to stop the payment and that if the Union of India was resiling from earlier communication then it will have no problem in making the payments. It ought to be a mater of internal arrangement between Union of India and the respondent-Bank as far as the petitioner is concerned, his entitlement to receive the pension could not be stopped without appropriate reasons. 2. The petitioner is, therefore, entitled to the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension from the date when it was stopped and the first respondent is directed to issue necessary instructions to the Bank. The petitioner will also be entitled to interest @ 7.5% for the arrears of pension payable to the petitioner. 3. The writ petition is allowed on the above terms. ( K. KANNAN ) AUGUST 24, 2011 JUDGE Rajan