SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 916

Supreme Court Of India
S.N. VARIAVAAND G.P. MATHUR, JJ.
W.B. FREEDOM FIGHTERS ORGANISATION -Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS -Respondents.
Writ Petition (C) No. 68 of 1999,
Decided on August 20,2004
Advocates appeared
Jaideep Gupta, Senior Advocate (Rana S. Biswas and Ms Sarla Chandra, Advocates, with him) for the Petitioner; .
PP. Malhotra, Additional Solicitor General (Hemant Shanna and Ms Sushma Suri, f Advocates, with him) for the Respondent;
S.K. Bhattacharya, Advocate, for Respondent;
Janaranjan Das, Swetaketu Mishra and Ms Moushumi Gahlot, Advocates, for Sinha & Das, Advocates, for the State of W.B.
Ms Sumita Ray, Advocate.

Headnote:Constitution of India-Article 32-Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980-Writ petition for direction to State Government to send reports to Union Government regarding expediting the payment of Freedom Fighters' Pension-State Advisory Committee, appointed on the direction of the S.C., considering the cases of the members of the petitioner-Association and rejecting all applications-None of the applicants produced documents required by the scheme-even presuming that the petition was in effect for payment of pension, committee has come to a conclusion on the basis of-Available material-Decision of the committee cannot be said to be perverse-Writ petition dismissed. (Para 17)

       AIR 1995 Calcutta 336, 2001(8) SCC 8, (1993) Supp. (3) SCC 2, 1996 (10) SCC 351, 2004(6) SCALE 478-Referred to.

       Constitution of India-Art. 32 - Swatantrata Sainik Sammon Pension Scheme (1980), Para-I-Writ filed for direction to State Government & sent report to Union of India to expedite payment of Freedom Pension Scheme-State Advisory opined that none of the applicant entitled/eligible for the pension scheme-None of the applicants has produced documents as required under the scheme-All having relied on certificates from co-freedom fighters without producing NARC's as required under the scheme-Conclusion of committee on basis of material available - It cannot be said as perverse-No reason to interfere-However as per recent policy decision-All persons who claim to have interned in jails-Territories-Now-Bangladesh-Their application be forwarded to Central Government for consideration. (Paras 17 & 18)

       AIR 1995 Calcutta 336, (2001)8 Sec. 8; (1993) Supp (3) SCC 2, (1996)10 Sec. 351, 2004 (6) Scale.-Referred to.

Judgment

S.N. VARIAVA, J.- By this writ petition, under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek the following relief:

"To issue writ/order/direction to the State Government to send reports about the freedom fighters to the Union Government to expedite payment of Freedom Fighters Pension from the commencement of the Scheme from 1-8-1980 to the petitioner Organisation being the freedom fighters."

This petition has been filed by the Association whose members claim to be freedom fighters.

2. ,The Government of India had announced a scheme known as the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 (hereinafter called "the Scheme") under which freedom fighters were to receive pension as mentioned in the Scheme. Any person who had suffered a minimum imprisonment of six months in the mainland jails before independence or in the case of SC/ST freedom fighter who had suffered minimum imprisonment for three months is eligible to receive the pension. The manner of proving claims is as follows:

"The applicants should furnish the documents indicated below whichever is applicable in order to prove his claimed sufferings for grant of pension under the Scheme:

(A) Imprisonment/detention:

Certificate from the jail authority, District Magistrate or the State Government concerned, indicating period of sentence awarded, date of admission, date of release and reasons for release, a nonavailability of records certificate (NARC) from the authorities concerned along with co-prisoners certificates (CPC) as under:

(i) Two co-prisoners certificates from th~freedom fighter pensioners who had a proven jail suffering of one year.

or

(ii) One co-prisoners certificate from a sitting MP or MLC or from an ex-MP or an ex-MLA specifying his jail period and that of the applicant (Annexure I in the application form).

(B) Documentary evidence by way of courts/governments orders proclaiming the applicant as an offender, announcing an

award on his head or for his arrest or ordering his detention. In the absence of such certificates from official records, a non-availability of records certificate from the authorities concerned along with a certificate from a prominent freedom fighter who had undergone imprisonment for a period of at least two years or more."

Thus, it is to be seen that the applicant has to furnish a certificate from the jail authority, District Magistrate or the State authorities indicating the period h of sentence awarded, date of admission, date of release and reasons for release and in the absence of such a certificate, a non-availability of records certificate (NARC) along with a co-prisoners certificate (CPC), namely, tWo certificates from freedom fighters who had a proven jail suffering for one year or one certificate from a sitting MP or MLA or an ex-MP or ex-MLA. In a case of persons having gone underground documentary evidence by way of proclamation of the applicant as an offender, announcing an award for his arrest or an order of detention. In the absence of official record a certificate from a prominent freedom fighter, who had undergone imprisonment for a period of at least two years, was to be given.

3. All the members of the petitioner Association had applied for pension. b It is their case that their applications were not being processed and that the State Government was not doing anything. This Court, by its order dated 12-10-2001, directed the State of West Bengal to appoint a State Advisory Committee, if not already appointed, and further directed the Committee to verify the cases of the members of the petitioner Association and communicate its opinion to this Court.

4. The State of West Bengal filed an affidavit on 4-2-2002 wherein it was set out that the State Advisory Committee had considered the cases of all and had rejected all the applications.

5. This Court by its order dated 15-2-2002 directed the State Government to file a better affidavit giving full particulars regarding verification. The d State Gove
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top