IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13431 of 2001 PERMANAND KUNWAR @ PARMANAND KUMAR Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- 6 22.1.2009 Having perused the materials on record as also after hearing the counsel appearing on behalf of all the parties, this Court would find that the claim of the petitioner for grant of pension under the Freedom Fighter Pension Scheme was based on very unsure grounds. Initially, the petitioner in the year 1981 came out to claim pension on the ground of his being an accused in G.R. Case No. 136 of 1942. The Government of India after considering such claim had rejected the case of the petitioner by an order dated 28.10.1983 on the ground that G.R. Case No. 136 of 1942 actually was withdrawn and was not sufficient to provide a basis for grant of pension. The petitioner however had made another attempt in the year 1984 and got his case recommended through the State Government by taking a plea that he was involved in Sessions Case No. 61 of 1943. In that extent, he had also relied on a judgment passed by the Assistant Session Judge, Bhagalpur. The respondents believing such statement of the petitioner to be correct 2 had sanctioned the pension on the basis of judgment of the Sessions Case No. 61 of 1943 by an order dated 2.5.1989 but soon thereafter, on the basis of an enquiry undertaken by the C.B.I., it came to the notice of the authorities of the Government of India that the copy of the judgment of the Court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur was forged/fabricated. Accordingly, the pension of the petitioner was suspended and a show- cause notice was issued on 23.2.1990. The petitioner surprisingly did not contest the genuineness of the judgment of Sessions Case No. 61 of 1943 and now switched over his claim to the earlier case i.e. G.R. Case No. 136 of 1942. The copy of the judgment as referred to was again sought to be verified by the Government of India and in response to such enquiry, the District Magistrate, Bhagalpur had sent a report that copy of the said G.R. Case no. 136 of 1942 was not issued by the record room of Bhagalpur. The matter was re-examined and the suspended pension of the petitioner was ultimately cancelled by an order dated 15.1.1997. This order was challenged by the petitioner in CWJC NO. 1535/1997 (wrongly mentioned as W.P. No. 1535/1997 in the counter affidavit) and the same was disposed of by this Court by an order dated 13.4.1999 3 by directing the case of the petitioner to be governed by a similar case of one Raghunath Kuer. Pursuant to the aforementioned order of this Court, the Government of India had asked the petitioner to produce acceptable document for supporting his claim but the petitioner did not produce any fresh document based on any official record and as such, the authorities have passed the final order rejecting his claim for grant of pension under the Freedom Fighter Pension Scheme. The said order reads as follows:- “In pursuance to the directions of the Hon’ble High Court of Bihar at Patna on C.W.J.C. No. 1535 of 1997 dated 13-4-99 you were requested vide this Ministry’s letter of even number dated 29th July, 1999 to produce fresh and acceptable documents, through the State Govt. in support of your claim. 2. In your letter dated 11.9.99, you have stated that Shri Bindeshwari Prasad Rana has been allowed pension in pursuance of the Court order. In their order passed in the case of Shri Bindeshwari Prasad Rana, the Hon’ble High Court ordered that the petitioner (shri Rana) can also produce secondary evidence afresh for consideration, if not produced already. Accordingly Shri Rana had produced fresh documents in support of his claim through the State Government and after considering his case afresh, S.S.S. Pension was sanctioned to Shri Rana based on his 4 involvement in a different case and not due to his involvement in Session Case number 61/43. You were also requested to produce afresh and acceptable documents in support of your claim through the State Government but you have failed to produce the requisite documents. Hence, in the absence of the fresh and acceptable documents your case cannot be considered for grant of S.S.S. Pension and same is rejected.” From the reading of the aforementioned reasons and reading of the writ application, this much is clear that neither on the plea of discrimination nor the plea of non-availability of document the petitioner could satisfy the Government of India with regard to the fulfillment of the terms and conditions for the grant of pension under Freedom Fighter Scheme. That being so, this Court would not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order and this application is accordingly dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)