IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2009 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1931 WA.No. 1117 of 2009 ------------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.31117/2004 Dated 08/08/2007 .................... APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT IN WPC -------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SPECIAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (FFP-B) DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & IST RESPONDENT IN WPC ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. N.SADANANDA SWAMY,MANGALATHU VEEDU, ADINADU SOUTH, KATTIKKADAVU.PO, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM. 2. UNION OF INDIA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, HOME AFFAIRS, GIRISH BHAVAN, MANTRALAYA,NEW DELHI. R1 BY ADV.SRI.N.DHARMADAN (SR.) & SMT.R.RANJINI THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & Kurian Joseph, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No. 1117 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 9th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. The State has come up in appeal aggrieved by the judgment dated 8th August, 2007 in W.P.(C) No.31117 of 2004. The issue pertains to the sanction of freedom fighter's pension. The learned Single Judge taking note of the elaborate materials produced by the writ petitioner issued a declaration to the effect that the petitioner is eligible for grant of pension under the Kerala Freedom Fighters Pension Rules. 2. The learned Senior Government Pleader has made two vehement contentions. Firstly it is stated that the learned Single Judge is not justified in issuing a declaration since sanction of pension is on the satisfaction of the authority concerned on the materials produced by the writ petitioner. We are afraid that this contention cannot be appreciated. The writ petitioner is aged 86 years. He has been W.A.No.1117 of 2009 - 2 - fighting for pension for the last several years. It is unfortunate that a freedom fighter who fought for the country has to fight for his pension also. Atleast at the evening of his age he should see the fruits of the fight he has made for the country in the form of eligible pension. Hence, there is no point in further directing the authority to consider the matter afresh. In the background of the prolonged litigation it will be unjust to again relegate the writ petitioner for another round before the authority. It is also pertinent in this context to note that it is only because the authorities did not take note of the documents in the proper perspective, the petitioner was compelled to approach this Court time and again. This Court has gone into the materials available and this Court is satisfied that the materials are sufficient for the grant of pension. Therefore, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Single Judge, in our view, is perfectly justified in issuing the declaration. 3. Yet another contention advanced by the learned Government Pleader is based on the Government Order G.O.(P) No.62/2008/GAD. dated 5th February, 2008. It is submitted that in W.A.No.1117 of 2009 - 3 - view of the legal provision as of now, the writ petitioner is not entitled to the pension. We are afraid that this contention also cannot be appreciated. Rule 23 of the Kerala Freedom Fighters Pension Rules is admittedly a new Rule. That Rule is issued pursuant to the order dated 5.2.2008 and that Rule, in any case, cannot govern the case of the writ petitioner, in whose favour this Court in the judgment dated 8th August, 2007 has recorded sufficiency of the materials making him eligible for pension. Therefore, we are in full agreement with the reasoning and finding of the learned Single Judge. The writ appeal, therefore, stands dismissed. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice Kurian Joseph, Judge vns