Pension entitlement should be determined based on the benefit of doubt and the date of the order, as decided by the Government.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The respondents applied before the Central Government for grant of freedom fighters pension. The Government of India on consideration of the application of the respondents granted freedom fighters pension w.e.f. the date of the order. The respondents filed a writ petition before the High Court claiming pension with retrospective effect from 1980. The High Court relying upon Duli Chand v. Union of India ((1992) 2 SCC 28 : 1992 SCC (L&S) 409 : (1992) 20 ATC 188) directed that the freedom fighters pension be given to the respondents w.e.f. 1980. This appeal by the Union of India is against the judgment of the High Court.

3. On 27-3-1995 we passed the following order :

"Mr. V. R. Reddy, the learned Additional Solicitor General, states that under the scheme and the guidelines, the respondents were only entitled to freedom fighters pension prospectively because these were the cases where benefit of doubt was given to them. Learned counsel for the respondents states that this averment has been made for the first time in this Court. He wishes to controvert it. Special leave petition is adjourned for four weeks."

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. We are of the view that the ratio in Duli Chand case ((1992) 2 SCC 28 : 1992 SCC (L&S) 409 : (1992) 20 ATC 188) is not applicable to the facts of the present case. In Duli Chand case ((1992) 2 SCC 28 : 1992 SCC (L&S) 409 : (1992) 20 ATC 188) this Court had by the order dated 16-7-1990 Duli Chand v. Union of India, 1990 Supp SCC 762 : 1991 SCC (L&S) 643 : (1990) 14 ATC 824) directed the Government of India to pay pension to the petitioners therein w.e.f. 1-8-1980. It was specifically mentioned in the order that all the 41 petitioners had produced the relevant documents supporting their claim and keeping in view the facts of these cases pension was directed to be given w.e.f. 1980. In this case the Government of India has categorically stated that the respondents were given benefit of doubt and as such the pension can only by given from the date of the order.

5. Keeping in view the documents produced by the respondents before the Government, the respondents have been rightly given pension by the Government of India from the date of the order. We allow this appeal, set aside the impugned order of the High Court and restore the order of the Government of India whereunder pension has been given to the respondents from the date of the order of the Government of India. No costs.