IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2009 / 6TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 8529 of 2004(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.MADHAVAN, MANKATTIL HOUSE, PUTHUSSERY P.O., (VIA) MANANTHAVADY-670 645, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.P.REGHURAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. *ADDL.RESPONDENT: 2. THE STATE OF KERALA REPTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (* IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.16.8.07 IN I.A.8767/07) ADV. SRI.V.V.SURESH, ADDL.CGSC SRI. AJITH KRISHNAN, ADDL.CGSC FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2009 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).8529/04 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1:- COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD DT.16.3.86 ORDER NO.R.DIS.8716/84-K7 EXT.P2:- COPY OF APPLICATION DT.30.7.77 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DT.11.2.82 ISSUED BY K.J. KURIEN AND K.T. JACOB EXT.P4:- COPY OF LETTER NO.191919/74/FFSZ DT.7.10.77OF THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P5:- COPY OF APPLICATION DT.16.3.86 SUBMITTED BEFORE RESPONDENT. EXT.P6:- COPY OF CERTIFICATE DT.12.6.85 ISSUED BY C.M.ABRAHAM EXT.P7:- COPY OF CERTIFICATE DT.20.6.85 ISSUED BY C.I.ANDREWS. EXT.P8:- COPY OF LETTER NO.136309/FFP-B2/GAD DT.23.12.82 OF THE SPECIAL SECRETARY TO GOVT., GOVT. OF KERALA,GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPT., TVM. EXT.P9:- COPY OF LETTER NO.119/39/83-FFSZ DT.20.1.83 OF RESPONDENT EXT.P10:- COPY OF LETTER NO.119/44/88-FFSZ DT.8.4.88 OF RESPONDENT EXT.P11:- COPY OF LETTER NO.57287/FFP A3/95 DT.18.5.98 OF ADL.SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF KERALA, TVM. EXT.P12:- COPY OF LETTER NO. D.O.119/39/1983/FF(SS)DT.3.11.03 OF THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR HOME AFFAIRS OF GOVT. OF INDIA, ADDRESSED TO SRI.P.C.THOMAS, MINISTER OF STATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE, GOVT. OF INDIA. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL okb //True Copy// P.A. to Judge C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.8529 OF 2004 ------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- The original first petitioner died during pendency of this writ petition and his wife and children are impleaded as additional petitioners 2 to 5. The averments in the writ petition is that the first petitioner had participated in freedom movement at his age of 14 years, in the year 1931, and he was detained in Muvattupuzha Jail for more than six months in the year 1939 as per order of the First Class Magistrate Court, Muvattupuzha. It is stated that he was again put to jail in the year 1946 and thereafter he was released only after independence. 2. The first petitioner was an allottee of Freedom Fighters' Pension under the State Government, as evidenced by Ext.P1. He applied for grant of Freedom Fighters' Pension under the Central Government, in the year 1977, supported by Certificate issued by two well-known freedom fighters. But his application was rejected as evidenced by Ext.P4 assigning the reason that the State Government has not recommended his case. Thereafter during the year 1986 he submitted further application supported by certificates issued by two veteran freedom fighters who had suffered imprisonment for more than 2 years in connection with the freedom struggle. Through Ext.P8 the first petitioner was informed by the State Government that his application was already forwarded to the Central Government for W.P.(C).8529/04-M 2 consideration along with the verification report. But the application was rejected as evidenced by Ext.P9 letter dt:20.1.1983. The reason for rejection is stated, as non-production of acceptable documentary evidence from official records relating to the sufferings claimed by the petitioner, and that the State Government have not recommended his case for grant of Central Government pension. Eventhough the first petitioner attempted to get the decision reviewed by submitting copies of the applications and records in support, it fetched no result. 3. In the meanwhile, during the year 1998, the first petitioner received a letter issued by the State Government informing that application for grant of Central Freedom Fighters' Pension has already been recommended by the State Government. Hence the petitioner contends that the rejection of his application assigning the reason that the State Government have not recommended his case, is not true and correct. This writ petition is filed seeking directions for sanctioning Central Freedom Fighters' Pension. 4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 1st respondent it is contended that the application submitted by the petitioner was not supported by proper documents in order to satisfy the criteria fixed for grant of pension under the Scheme formulated by the Central Government. It is stated that eventhough the first petitioner claimed imprisonment during various periods in the year 1942, 1943 and 1944 and also underground sufferings for about 7 months in the year 1946, the State Government had reported that W.P.(C).8529/04-M 3 enquiries made through the District Collector revealed that no jail records are available. Hence in the absence of acceptable primary or secondary evidence with respect to sufferings undergone by the first petitioner, he cannot be granted with Freedom Fighters Pension, is the contention. It is also stated that the records produced are not acceptable as records required under the provisions of the Scheme. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that on more than one occasion the application of the original petitioner was rejected assigning the reason that the State Government have not recommended his case, but it is evident from Ext.P11 that in fact the State Government had recommended his case. Therefore the rejection of the application was without adverting to Ext.P11. He further submits that taking note of the recommendations by the State Government, the widow of the original petitioner who is impleaded in this case, is eligible to get the pension under the Central Government Scheme. 6. It is pertinent to note that in none of the communications issued by the Central Government rejecting the applications submitted, there is mention about Ext.P11 letter. But it is evident from Ext.P11 that the State Government had in fact recommended for grant of pension. However, since the first petitioner, who was the applicant is no more, the question whether his widow is eligible for pension in view of the recommendations of the State Government, need further examination at the hands of the 1st respondent. W.P.(C).8529/04-M 4 Therefore it is only just and proper in the interest of justice to permit the 2nd petitioner herein to approach 1st respondent through proper representation in this regard, producing a copy of Ext.P11 letter. 7. In the result the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd petitioner to file representation before the 1st respondent producing a copy of Ext.P11 letter and copy of this Judgment, along with other records if available in support of the claim. If any such representation is received, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the 1st respondent as early as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb