IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10191 of 2001 Prem Kumari Devi, wife of Jwala Pd. Singh, resident of Village- Rukunpura, P.S.-Danapur, District- Patna. ………………………………………. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Freedom Fighters Division, Lok Nayak Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. The Under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Freedom Fighter Division, Lok Nayak Bhawan, New Delhi. 4. Accountant General, (A&E) I, Bihar, Ranchi. 5. Senior Accounts Officer, Office of the Accountant General (A&E), Bihar, Ranchi-834002. 6. Accounts Officer, Office of the Accountant General (A&E) 7 Bihar Ranchi, 834002. 7. Treasury Officer, Patna Treasury, Patna. 8. Director-cum-Joint Secretary, Department of Home (Special) Bihar, Patna. …………………………………. Respondents ----------- 4 22.1.2009 After perusing the materials on record and hearing the counsel appearing on behalf of the Government of India as also Government of Bihar, this Court is satisfied that there is merely a lip service in the name of payment of amount under the freedom fighter pension scheme. The father of the petitioner namely late Hari Saran Singh was sanctioned freedom fighter pension and when he had died on 7.6.1984, his widow kept on knocking the doors of the authorities of the Government of India for being paid the amount of pension but, till her life time i.e. in the next 11 years or so i.e. up to 26.8.1995, she was not paid the amount of pension. 2 After the death of the parents, the petitioner started running around for getting the dues for the period 1984 to 1995 and despite repeated reminders sent by the authorities of the State Government and Accountant General, the authorities of Government of India till date have not woken up from this slumber. All that has been said in the counter affidavit sworn way back on 19.10.2001, is that a communication has been sent by the official of the Government of India to the official of the Government of Bihar seeking enquiry as to whether the petitioner is the sole heir of late H.S. Singh and as to why the payment of pension was not made to the widow of late H.S. Singh. In a span of eight years from the aforesaid query nothing has been brought on record to show that the enquiry started by the Government of India in the letter as contained in Annexure-A to the counter affidavit, has been completed. The net impact is that a person claiming for payment of pension for the period 7.6.1984 to 26.8.1995 has not only been made to run around but also being subjected to the questioning of her identity. This Court fails to understand as to when the red-tapism existing in the offices of the Government shall come to an end ?. A plain and simple procedure adopted in time could have 3 easily solved the problem facilitating the petitioner to avail the benefit of the amount of pension of her parents. An amount of Rs. 99,824.86/- was only payable to the petitioner and thus, even if, there was any doubt with regard to the succession of the petitioner, either she could have called upon to produce the succession certificate or could have been asked to produce an indemnity bond for the same amount so that the Government could be compensated by the petitioner if anyone else came out with the claim of such amount of pension. The Government however, till date has not decided the issue though the letter of the Accountant General, Bihar dated 23.2.1999 leaves nothing for speculation that the Accountant General was itself satisfied not only with regard to the claim of amount but also its payment to the petitioner by way of being an heir of late H.S. Singh. Under such circumstances, this Court must hold the authorities of the Government of India guilty for depriving the petitioner from the amount of pension of his father for a period of twenty-five years i.e. from 7.6.1984 when late H.S. Singh died and till date. In that view of the matter this Court would direct the authorities of the Government of India to do the 4 needful by issuing the necessary sanction order within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. As the petitioner for no fault on her part stood deprived from payment of pension, this Court would also direct for payment of the entire amount along with interest @ 5% per annum from the date of her entitlement i.e. 7.6.1984 to the date of payment which must be made to the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of this order by the Respondents. With the aforementioned observations/direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)