1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.12.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN W.P.(MD)No.5164 of 2011 R.T.Govindan .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Political Pension) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9. 2.The District Collector, Collectorate Office, Dindigul District. .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records connected with the notice issued by the respondent No.2 in O.Mu.No.2806/2000/R3 dated 25.6.2009 and quash the same as illegal, consequently directing the respondents to provide Freedom Fighter Pension to the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Rathinam for Mr.R.Venkatesan For Respondents : Mr.M.Alagudevan, Special Government Pleader. O R D E R The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition, challenging the rejection of his request for the grant of Freedom Fighters Pension. 2. I have heard Mr.P.Rathinam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Alagudevan, learned Special Government Pleader for respondents. 3. The petitioner claims to have participated in the Quit India Movement and claims to have gone underground for more than one year, during the period from 18.8.1942 to 20.8.1943, fearing police repression. 4. When the petitioner submitted a representation to the Central Government for the grant of Freedom Fighters Pension, he was directed to appear for an enquiry before the Tahsildar. After the enquiry, the petitioner was directed to produce certain records and he appeared for a second time before the District Collector. The petitioner also produced a Certificate from a Freedom Fighter by name Mayandi Bharathi and submitted the same along with a Certificate issued by a Member of Parliament. But the first respondent issued communications dated 15.5.2007 and 4.3.2008, calling upon the petitioner either to produce the Certificate of incarceration or a Certificate from two co-prisoners. The District https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 Collector also informed the petitioner by a communication dated 23.12.2008 that unless the petitioner produced those Certificates, his case could not be considered. 5. When the petitioner persisted with the request, the second respondent informed him by a letter dated 25.6.2009 that his request cannot be processed without the following documents:- “1. kDjhuh; Rje;jpug; nghuhl;lj;jpy; fye;J bfhz;L rpiw Jd;gk; mDgtpj;jikf;F Mjhukhf rpiwr;rhd;W rkh;g;gpf;ftpy;iy. 2. chpa gotj;jpy; bgwg;gl;l rfifjp rhd;W rkh;g;gpf;ftpy;iy. 3. kDjhuh; rpiwthrk; milahky; jiykiwt[ thH;f;if thH;e;jth; vd;gtUf;F Mjhukhf Kjy; jfty; mwpf;if kw;Wk; kDjhuhpd; bgah; Fwpg;gpl;L jz;lid tH';Ftjw;F Mjhuk; my;yJ ePjpkd;wj;jpy; gpwg;gpf;fg;gl;l gpo Miz Vjt[k; kDjhuh; rkh;g;gpf;ftpy;iy. 4. kDjhuhpd; rpiwj;jz;lid Kjyhd tpgu';fs; @ahh; vth;@ g[j;jfj;jpy; ,lk; bgw;wjw;fhd g[j;jf efy; kDjhuh; rkh;g;gpf;ftpy;iy. 5. kDjhuh; kj;jpa murhy; tH';fg;gl;l jhkpu gj;jpuk; efy; rkh;g;gpf;ftpy;iy. 6. kDjhuh; nghuhl;lj;jpy; fye;J bfhz;L jz;lid bgw;w fhyj;jpy; mtuJ taJ 18 epuk;gpajw;fhd rhd;W Mjhuk; vJt[k; rkh;g;gpf;ftpy;iy.” 6. Therefore, aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner is before this Court. 7. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner did not undergo incarceration. Therefore, the first two reasons stated in the impugned order will not apply to the case of the petitioner. When the petitioner has not undergone imprisonment, he cannot be called upon to produce the proof of having undergone incarceration. Consequently, he cannot also be called upon to produce the Certificates of 2 co-prisoners. 8. The reasons stated at Serial Nos.4, 5 and 6 are also not applicable, in view of the fact that the petitioner had not undergone incarceration. The only condition if at all, that could be applied to the case of the petitioner is reason No.3. Under reason No.3, the petitioner has been called upon to produce either a copy of the FIR or proof of any warrant issued against him, to show that he went underground. But it is not clear as to whether the demand so made, is in tune with the Scheme for the grant of Freedom Fighters Pension. 9. The petitioner has produced a Certificate from one Mr.Mayandi Bharathi. The Certificate issued by the said Mayandi Bharathi was accepted in the case of one A.Manickam Pillai, by the Apex Court itself in the judgment reported in The State of Tamil Nadu vs. A.Manickam Pillai {2010 (2) SCC 669}. The fact that Mayandi Bharathi was a Freedom Fighter is accepted. Apart from his Certificate, the petitioner has also produced Certificate from late K.Kamaraj. Therefore, there is no reason to suspect his bona fides. The petitioner is now 87 years old. The demand for production of a copy of the FIR or a copy of the warrant issued, in the case of persons who went underground, may be impossible of being complied with, especially at this distance of time. Once the credibility of the persons who gave Certificates is unquestionable, the respondents may have to adopt a pragmatic and liberal approach. This is for the reason that at the time when people fought for freedom, they never thought that they would have to preserve any document for the purpose of claiming any credit or benefit at a later point of time. Therefore, I am of the view that the matter requires reconsideration by the respondents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 10. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the matter remitted back to the first respondent for a fresh consideration. The petitioner shall produce proof of age, to show that he is otherwise eligible as per the scheme. On the basis of the proof of age and on the basis of the Certificates given by late K.Kamaraj and Mayandi Bharathi, the first respondent shall reconsider the matter and pass fresh orders, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. sd/- Assistant Registrar (T&P) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Political Pension) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9. 2. The District Collector, Collectorate Office, Dindigul District. + 1 cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR No.43354 Order in WP(MD) 5164/2011 12-12-2011 Svn RJ/19.12.11 3p/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/