CWP No. 15709 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CWP No. 15709 of 2008 Date of decision January 11, 2010 Dial Singh ....... Petitioner Versus Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs(Freedom Fighter Division) Ist floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi. ........ Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Mr. B. S. Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the respondent. **** K. Kannan, J (oral). 1. The petitioner seeks for a direction against the respondent for grant of freedom fighter pension under the Swantantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 formerly known as Freedom Fighters Sainani Pension Scheme, 1972. The scheme provides for grant of pension to a person who has suffered imprisonment of six months in main land jails before independence. The mode of proof of such imprisonment is set out in clause 9 of the Scheme which requires inter alia a certificate from the concerned Jail authorities, District Magistrate or the State Government. In this case, the petitioner claims to be a freedom fighter and seeks pension on the proof of his status as a freedom fighter. The petitioner places reliance on a certificate issued by the State Government and refer to a communication dated 1.7.1999 to the Under Secretary to Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Freedom Fighters Division. The communication refers to verification done at the instance of the State Government and proof of the fact that the petitioner had suffered CWP No. 15709 of 2008 2 imprisonment from 25.7.1946 to 31.1.1947 in Central Jail Lahore on account of his participation in 'Harsa Chhina Moga Morcha” Movement during freedom struggle which is a recognized freedom movement. In support of his claim, he has produced an application and affidavit duly attested by a Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar and a co-prisoners Certificate and an affidavit of Sh. Gursharan Singh duly attested by Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar. Another co-prisoner's certificate and an affidavit of Sh. Kundan Singh duly attested by the Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar have also been submitted. The communication states that all concerned authorities of the State Government who could have relevant record in respect of the claim of the applicant have been consulted and it is confirmed that the official records of the relevant time are not available with the State Government. The State Government has otherwise satisfied itself through suitable enquiries from the Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar that sufferings have been undergone genuinely by the applicant. 2. In view of the definite proof tendered by the applicant which is certified by the State Government it is inexplicable as to why the claim of the petitioner has not been answered by the Union. The reply filed by the Union through Sh. Om Parkash , Under Secretary to the Government does not in any way dispute the certificate issued by the State Government. The reply states that the imprisonment shall be for a period of one year which is not what the scheme refers to. The Scheme envisages only 6 month's imprisonment. The reply also refers to a requirement of proof of discharge book/certificate issued by the concerned military authority that the petitioner had been associated with the INA. The claim of pension is not that he was associated with the INA. Therefore, the requirement of such certificate is set forth in para 4 of the reply has no substance. There are no valid grounds to deny to the petitioner the pension available under the Scheme. The Union ought to have acted on CWP No. 15709 of 2008 3 the certificate made by the State and the verification done at that level which is stipulated as one of the methods of proof, as required in clause 9 of the Scheme referred to above. The writ petition is bound to succeed and the writ petitioner shall be granted pension as set out under the Scheme. The respondent is directed to consider the claim in right earnest and issue appropriate orders within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Needless to state that benefit of the scheme will commence from the date of his application. 3. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE January 11, 2010 archana