IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1931 WA.No. 1846 of 2009 ---------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.36359/2007 Dated 24/03/2009 .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENT IN THE WRIT PETITION -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (FFP.B) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA RESPONDENT/PETITIONER IN THE WRIT PETITION ------------------------------------------------------------------------- V.SUKUMARAN, VADAKKETHAYYIL MANNANCHERRY.P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.SATHEESH THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No.1846 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. This writ appeal is filed by the State being aggrieved by the direction issued by the learned Single Judge to reconsider the case of the writ petitioner regarding grant of Kerala Freedom Fighters Pension. 2. It is contended that no doubt the learned Single Judge has rightly remanded the matter for reconsideration, but the sentence in the impugned judgment that 'it is not necessary to insist the petitioner for production of any supporting documents to prove his detention period in jail and other details' is not correct. It is contended that unless there is documentary evidence it will not be possible for the Government to consider the claim and take a proper decision. 3. We find force in the contention of the learned Government Pleader. Hence, without interfering with the direction W.A.No.1846 of 2009 - 2 - issued by the learned Single Judge for reconsideration of the writ petitioner's case, we make it clear that the observation of the learned Single Judge that “the authority need not insist upon production of documents” is incorrect and it is deleted. It will be open to the authority to consider the matter afresh and if necessary ask the writ petitioner to produce documents which are necessary to support his claim. The authority concerned shall pass appropriate orders within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. With this observation the writ appeal is dismissed. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice A.K. Basheer, Judge vns