1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.1073 OF 1994 Santram s/o Dajiba Thakur, Age : 73 years, Occu.Nil, R/o Opp. Indraprastha Hotel, Main Road, Latur, Dist. Latur (deceased), through his L.Rs. 1) Rajaram Santram Thakur, Age : 34 years, Occ.Service, R/o Latur,Dist. Latur 2) Smt. Gangabai Santram Thakur, Age : 65 years, Occ. H.H., R/o Latur 3) Smt. Pamanbai Santram Thakur, Age : 55 years, Occ. H.H., R/o Latur 4) Shakuntalabai w/o Gajananrao Lokhande, Age : 37 years, Occ. Household, R/o Karkhed, Tq. Omerkhed 5) Sow. Chanda Kalyanrao Gaikwad, Age : 36 years, Occ. H.H., R/o Beed, Dist. Beed 6) Sow. Mayavati w/o Sunilkumar Bhosale, Age : 31 years, Occ. H.H., R/o Bhat Limbgaon, Tq. Indapur 7) Sow. Chaya w/o Prakashrao Ahire, Age : 29 years, Occ. H.H., R/o Malegaon, Dist. Nashik 2 8) Sow. Lalita w/o Janardhan Shankpal, Age : 30 years, Occ. Household, R/o Chikalthana, Dist. Aurangabad 9) Sow. Anita Arjunrao Chauhan, Age : 28 years, Occ. Household, R/o Parewadi, Tq. Paranda, 10) Sunita w/o Motilal Ahire, Age : 26 years, Occ. Household, R/o Malegaon, Dist. Nashik ..PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, 2. Minister for General Administration, Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Bombay 3. Shri Tulsidas Jadhav, President of High Power Committee (Freedom Fighter), Mantralaya, Mumbai 4. The Collector, Osmanabad 5. The Collector, Latur ..RESPONDENTS Mr Vivek Bhavthankar, Advocate for petitioners; Mr K.B. Choudhary, AGP for respondent no.1. CORAM: P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE : 22nd JULY, 2009 3 ORAL JUDGMENT: [PER P.V. HARDAS, J.] This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by which the petitioners pray for directing the respondents to grant Freedom Fighter’s pension to the petitioners. It appears that the deceased petitioner who claimed to be a Freedom Fighter submitted necessary application to the respondents in the prescribed proforma along with necessary documents. This application had been submitted by the petitioner some time in the year 1993. According to the petitioners, the said application of deceased petitioner is still pending and has not been decided so far. Though the respondents are served, no return has been filed by the respondents. This petition has remained pending since the year 1994 and, therefore, we are inclined to allow this petition and direct the respondents to decide the application of the petitioner, if the same is still pending. 2. Accordingly we allow this petition and direct respondents to decide the application of the petitioner for Freedom Fighter’s pension within four weeks from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner, if the application submitted by the petitioner is still pending. In the event of the application having been decided earlier, we direct the respondents to communicate the decision thereon to the petitioners. 4 3. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. [ A.V. POTDAR, J ] [ P.V. HARDAS, J ] 5