HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25588 of 2008 Date : 21.10.2011 Between : Mudumba Narasimha Chary. …..Petitioner And Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs (Freedom Fighters Division) & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25588 of 2008 ORDER : This writ petition is filed, with the prayer, which reads as under: “to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction preferably a Writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 1st and 2nd respondents in not restoring the freedom fighter pension to the petitioner pursuant to the Letter No.16631/FF.III/2008, dt.31.1.2007 and not disposing of the representation of the petitioner dt.1.9.2008 as being wholly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to forthwith restore freedom fighter pension to the petitioner pursuant to the said letter dt.31.1.2007 issued by the 3rd respondent by disposing of the representation of the petitioner dt.1.9.2008.” The petitioner was granted freedom fighters pension under ‘Swathantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980’. It appears, one other person, by name Sri Kotte Laxmaiah, a resident of Dharmavaram village of Warangal District, had applied for pension, which was rejected. When he represented that his claim is similar to that of the petitioner, again, papers submitted by the petitioner were reviewed. Pursuant to such exercise of review undertaken by respondents 1 and 2, a show cause notice, dated 17th May 2000, was issued to the petitioner stating that in his application, he has mentioned as “Underground fighting during the year 1356-57 sponsored by State Congress”. In that view of the matter, it is alleged that only at the instance of the Congress, the petitioner had gone underground on his own volition voluntarily, which cannot be considered as ‘suffering’ for grant of pension under ‘Swathantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme’. On the aforesaid ground, while calling for further material from the petitioner, the pension granted to him, was suspended. Petitioner has submitted a detailed explanation on 21.06.2000, in response to the show cause notice dated 17th May 2000, issued by respondents 1 and 2. When pension was not restored without passing any further orders, he approached this Court by filing this writ petition in the year 2008. This Court, by order dated 10th December 2008, issued interim directions for restoring the pension of the petitioner. It is stated that pursuant to the interim orders of this Court, pension which was being paid to the petitioner, was restored and is also being paid to him now. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to his representation made in response to the notice dated 17th May 2000, the State Government was addressed, which has also recommended twice for restoration of his pension, inspite of the same, no orders have been passed. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents, while referring to the recommendations made by the State Government, it is stated that the matter needs further inquiry and comments by the State Government. In this case, it is to be noticed that the notice suspending the pension was issued as early as on 17th May 2000, for which, the petitioner has replied on 21.06.2000, therefore, there appears no reason for not taking a decision for such a long time. It is also to be noticed that when the State Government was addressed after filing of representation by the petitioner on 21.06.2000, even the State Government has recommended for restoration of pension twice in favour of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, as it is stated in the counter affidavit that further inquiry is necessary for passing appropriate orders, and taking into account that pension payable to the petitioner is restored pursuant to the interim orders, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to pass appropriate orders pursuant to the show cause notice, dated 17th May 2000, by taking into account the recommendations made by the State Government for restoration of pension, and take appropriate decision as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. There shall be a further direction to the respondents to continue payment of pension to the petitioner till appropriate final orders are passed and communicated to the petitioner. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 21st October 2011 ajr