IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 23034 of 2001 Between: Garlapati Padmavathi W/o G. Raghava Rao R/o 6-6-430/12A, Gandhinagar, Secundrabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Additional Secretary to Govt. of A.P., Revenue (FF) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The Joint Secretary, Govt. of A.P., Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order or direction or a writ particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the application and send by the petitioners applications case for grant of freedom fighters pension though the petitioner made applications to the respondents duly enclosing relevant documents as demanded by defeating the aims and objections of the liberalised freedom fighters pension scheme and also in violation of Art. 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent to grant state freedom fighters pension from the date of application made by the petitioner to the respondent authorities and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.P.DEVAKI DEVI Counsel for the Respondent No.1 &2: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: The case of the petitioner is that he is in receipt of Freedom Fighters Pension from the State Government from October, 1984 and motivated by the introduction of Swathantra Sainik Pension Scheme, in 1972, he made an application to the Government of India, but no action has been taken. It is further averred that the petitioner came to know that the State Government have been granted pension to the Freedom Fighters and has increased the pension to Rs.3,000/- and he also made representation to the Central Government, but to his misfortune, he has not kept a copy of the representation. Since no action has been taken by the Government on his representation, he filed the present writ petition. It is really unfortunate that there is nothing before this court to show that the representations submitted by the petitioner either to the Central Government or to the State Government have gone unattended to, except an acknowledgement dated 5.5.2000, addressed to the first respondent herein. In such circumstances, I deem it appropriate to direct the petitioner to make representation to the respondents giving details and in the event of the petitioner filing such representation, the respondents are directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of eight weeks from the date of such receipt and communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner. With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Elipe Dharma Rao, J. July 7, 2005 MAS. To 1. The Additional Secretary to Govt. of A.P., Revenue (FF) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The Joint Secretary, Govt. of A.P., Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3. Two CCs to the Govt. Pleader for Revenue, A.P. High court Building, Hyderabad. 4. 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SRAVAN}