IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 27TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 23480 of 2008(T) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ UMADEVI ANTHERJANAM, W/O.LATE SANKARAN NAMBOOTHIRI, MANKULATHU ILLAM, THAYAKURUNTHU, KANKOLE P.O.,PAYYANNUR VIA, KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA. BY ADVS. MR.M.SASINDRAN, MR.K.P.HARISH. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY UNDER SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, FREEDOM FIGHTERS DIVISION,LOK NAYAK BHAVAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI 110 003 BY ADV.MR.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDIA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.23480/2008 T APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE TRUE EXTRACT FROM THE CONVICT PRISONERS REGISTER ISSUED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL PRISON, KANNUR. P2: COPY OF THE SWATHANTRATHA SAINIK SAMMAN PENSION SCHEME 1980. P3: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD. 10/02/2006 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF THE CO-PRISONERS CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY K.P.KANNAN. P5: COPY OF THE CO-PRISONER'S CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY P.RAMAN MANIYANI. P6: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR SANCTIONING FREEDOM FIGHTERS PENSION TO THE PETITIONER CONSEQUENT TO THE DEATH OF HER HUSBAND. P7: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 2/08/2007 IN WPC.NO.14245 OF 2006. P8: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 1/05/2008 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.23480 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated 16th February, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner's husband late Sankaran Namboodiri was the recipient of State Freedom Fighters' Pension that was sanctioned as per Ext.P6 order passed by the District Collector, Cannanore with effect from 6.8.1974. He passed away on 20.1.1979. He was closely associated with the Karivellur Struggle, a freedom movement and in connection with his participation in the Karivellur Struggle, he was imprisoned during the period from 27.9.1947 to 26.3.1948. 2. Long after the petitioner's husband passed away, persons who participated in the Karivellur Struggle and widows of participants were made eligible for the grant of Central Freedom Fighters' Pension with effect from 20.1.1998 under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980. The petitioner thereupon submitted Ext.P3 application accompanied by copies of Ext.P1, extract from the Convict/Prisoners' Register maintained by the Superintendent of Central, Prison, Kannur, Exts.P4 and P5 Personal Knowledge Certificates issued by co-prisoners and participants in the Karivellur Struggle. She had also enclosed a copy of Ext.P6 order sanctioning State Freedom Fighters' Pension to her husband. Ext.P3 application WP(C).No.23480/2008 2 was submitted on 10.2.2006 to the State Government. When the State Government did not forward the original thereof to the Central Government, the petitioner was constrained to file W.P.(C)No.14245 of 2006 in this Court. By Ext.P7 judgment delivered on 2.8.2007, after notice to the respondents, this Court directed the State Government to forward the original of the petitioner's application for Central Freedom Fighters' Pension together with the accompanying documents to the Central Government with their recommendation within two months. The first respondent Union of India was directed to consider the same and pass orders within another two months thereafter. 3. As directed by this Court in Ext.P7 judgment, the Government of India considered Ext.P3 application, which was produced and marked as Ext.P5 in W.P.(C)No.14245 of 2006, and rejected the same. The said decision was communicated to the petitioner by Ext.P8 letter dated 1.5.2008. A reading of Ext.P8 indicates that Government of India rejected the petitioner's application for Central Freedom Fighters' Pension on the short ground that though Ext.P1 discloses that the petitioner's husband was admitted in the Central Prison, Kannur on 27.9.1947 and was later transferred to Central Jail, Vellur on 2.11.1947, no material has been produced to show that he continued to be under imprisonment even thereafter and WP(C).No.23480/2008 3 that there is no material to prove that he had undergone imprisonment for the minimum period of six months. The Government of India also held that the petitioner has not produced a Non-availability of Records Certificate from the State Government and that the petitioner's claim cannot be entertained. Ext.P8 is under challenge in this writ petition. The petitioner contends relying on Ext.P1 that the grounds stated by the Government of India to reject her application, are not tenable. 4. A statement dated 25.12.2009 has been filed by the Assistant Solicitor General of India on behalf of the respondents wherein, supporting the stand taken by Government of India in Ext.P8, it is contended that as the petitioner has not proved that her husband had any connection with the freedom struggle and was imprisoned for the minimum period of six months, she is not entitled to grant of Central Freedom Fighters' Pension. 5. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel appearing on either side. In Ext.P3 application, the petitioner had categorically stated that her husband had undergone imprisonment during the period from 27.9.1947 to 26.3.1948. She had also enclosed along with it the original of Ext.P1 and also the judgment of the conviction and sentence passed by the trial court. She had also enclosed originals of Exts.P4 and P5 Personal Knowledge WP(C).No.23480/2008 4 Certificates issued by co-prisoners in the prescribed form. The Government of India rejected the petitioner's application for grant of Pension on the short ground that she has not proved that her husband had undergone imprisonment in connection with the freedom struggle for the minimum period of six months. It is stated that, though Ext.P1 certificate discloses that the petitioner's husband was sentenced to imprisonment on 9.6.1947, was released on bail on 9.6.1947, was re- arrested on 27.9.1947, was admitted to the prison on 27.9.1947 and was transferred to Central Jail, Vellur on 2.11.1947, there is nothing in Ext.P1 which would show the actual period of imprisonment. It is for that reason that the Government of India have chosen to reject the Personal Knowledge Certificates issued by co-prisoners. A mere reading of Ext.P1 establishes beyond doubt that the term of imprisonment which the petitioner's husband had undergone came to an end only on 26.3.1948. It is the admitted case of both parties that after his initial enlargement on bail, the petitioner's husband was re- arrested and imprisoned on 27.9.1947 and thereafter he was shifted to Central Prison, Velllur on 2.11.1947. He had undergone imprisonment in that jail till 26.3.1948. Therefore, Ext.P1 establishes beyond doubt that he had undergone imprisonment for a period of six months. This aspect has not been considered when Ext.P8 order was passed by the WP(C).No.23480/2008 5 Government of India. 6. Since Ext.P1 establishes the fact that the petitioner's husband had undergone imprisonment for the minimum prescribed period of six months, there was no necessity to refer to and rely on the Personal Knowledge Certificates issued by co-prisoners. As a matter of fact, the said certificates also disclose that the petitioner's husband had undergone imprisonment during the period from 27.9.1947 to 26.3.1948. The Government of India have also stated that the petitioner has not produced the Non-availability of Records Certificate from the State Government and in the absence of such a record, the Personal Knowledge Certificates produced by the petitioner cannot be relied upon. In my opinion, the Government erred in taking the stand that the petitioner should have produced a Non-availability of Records Certificate issued by the State Government. As noticed earlier, Ext.P1 establishes beyond doubt that the petitioner's husband had undergone imprisonment in connection with the freedom struggle for a period of six months from 27.9.1947 to 26.3.1948. It was therefore unnecessary to insist on production of a Non-availability of Records Certificate. I accordingly hold that the rejection of the petitioner's application for grant of Central Freedom Fighters' Pension under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 is illegal. WP(C).No.23480/2008 6 In the result, I allow this writ petition, quash Ext.P8 and direct the Government of India to grant Central Freedom Fighters' Pension to the petitioner under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 with effect from the date on which her application for Pension complete in all aspects was received by the Government of India. Necessary orders in that regard shall be issued and payment of pension effected expeditiously, and in any event within two months from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before the Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Freedom Fighters' Division. P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge TKS