Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Arijit Banerjee, J.
Sri Shiba Prasad Roy & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors. - Respondents
W.P. 17078 & 17080 (W) of 2013; 13754 (W) of 2014
Decided On : 26-11-2015
For the Petitioners:Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv., Dibyendu Chatterjee, Jhuma Chakraborty, Nirmalendu Bera and Gora Chand Samanta, Advocates
For the Respondent For 4, 7, 8 and 10:Sandip Kr. Bhattacharya, Nizamuddin, Advocate
The government's discontinuation of the Assistance to Political Sufferers Scheme without providing cogent reasons and justification was arbitrary and unreasonable and violated the petitioners' legitimate expectation to continue receiving the benefit.
Headnote:
ASSISTANCE TO POLITICAL SUFFERERS - DISCONTINUATION - LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION - JUDICIAL REVIEW - PUBLIC INTEREST - POLICY DECISION - ARBITRARINESS - FAIRNESS - ARTICLE 14 - DOCTRINE OF LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION - JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION - REASONABLE EXPECTATION - PUBLIC LAW - ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY - BENEFIT OR ADVANTAGE - RATIONAL GROUNDS - HEARING OPPORTUNITY - DUE CONSIDERATION - NON-ARBITRARINESS - RULE OF LAW - PUBLIC INTEREST - POLITICAL AGENDA - RULE OF LAW - COGENT REASONS - JUSTIFICATION - POLICY CHANGE - PUBLIC INTEREST - SCHEME REVIVAL - MONTHLY ALLOWANCE - EFFECTIVE DATE - LEGALLY VALID ORDER - JUSTIFICATION - DISCONTINUANCE:
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged a memorandum discontinuing the Assistance to Political Sufferers Scheme with effect from 1st February 2013. The scheme provided monthly allowances to political sufferers who participated in democratic movements post-independence. The petitioners argued that the scheme created a right in favor of the political sufferers to receive the monthly allowance during their lifetime and that the discontinuation was illegal, arbitrary, and without justification.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioners had a legitimate expectation to continue receiving the benefit under the lifetime assistance scheme and that the government was required to provide cogent reasons and justification for withdrawing the benefit. The court found that the impugned memorandum did not disclose any reasons for the discontinuation of the scheme and that the scheme was not for the benefit of the public in general but for a special section of the public who had made selfless sacrifices for the country. The court held that the discontinuation of the scheme was arbitrary and unreasonable and quashed the impugned memorandum.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners had a legitimate expectation to continue receiving the benefit under the lifetime assistance scheme. 2. Whether the government was required to provide cogent reasons and justification for withdrawing the benefit. 3. Whether the impugned memorandum disclosed any reasons for the discontinuation of the scheme. 4. Whether the scheme was for the benefit of the public in general or a special section of the public.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the petitioners had a legitimate expectation to continue receiving the benefit under the lifetime assistance scheme based on the following factors: - The government had introduced the scheme as a policy decision in recognition of the immense sacrifice made by political sufferers for the country. - The scheme was implemented for a considerable period of time, and the quantum of monthly allowance was enhanced from time to time. - The petitioners were wholly or partially dependent on the monthly allowance for their survival. 2. The court held that the government was required to provide cogent reasons and justification for withdrawing the benefit based on the following principles: - A change in policy decision which has the effect of withdrawing the benefit from the citizens of the country may not be interfered with if such change of policy decision is justified and such decision must be manifested in the form of cogent reasons showing that such change of policy was necessary in greater public interest. - The doctrine of legitimate expectation has been recognized by the law of the land and provides a sufficient interest to enable one who cannot point to the existence of a substantive right to obtain the leave of the court to apply for judicial review. - The doctrine does not give the scope to claim relief straightaway from the administrative authorities as no crystallized right as such is involved. The protection of such legitimate expectation does not require the fulfillment of the expectation where an overriding public interest requires otherwise. 3. The court held that the impugned memorandum did not disclose any reasons for the discontinuation of the scheme. The memorandum merely stated that 'the State Government has decided that the said scheme which has not been serving the interest of public in general may be discontinued.' 4. The court held that the scheme was not for the benefit of the public in general but for a special section of the public who had made selfless sacrifices for the country.
Final Decision: The court quashed the impugned memorandum and directed the State Government to reconsider the issue of discontinuance of the scheme for providing assistance to political sufferers and come to a reasoned and informed decision. The scheme was revived, and the beneficiaries were entitled to receive the monthly allowance thereunder with effect from 1st February 2013, till the scheme was in subsistence and until the same was discontinued by a legally valid order justifying such discontinuance.
Arijit Banerjee, J.
In all the three writ petitions, the petitioners challenge a memorandum bearing No. 03 APS dated 15th January, 2013 issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Finance Department, whereby a scheme for assistance to political sufferers was directed to be discontinued with effect from 1st February, 2013. Accordingly the three writ petitions were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.
2. The petitioner no. 1 in WP No. 17078 (W) of 2013 is the Secretary of the Barasat Unit West Bengal Political Sufferers' Pensioners Welfare Association and the petitioner no. 2 is the Secretary of Jalpaiguri Post Independence Pensioners' Welfare Association. Both are registered associations. The petitioner no. 3 is the President of the Political Sufferers' Pensioners Welfare Society.
3. It is the case of the petitioners that the erstwhile State Government having considered the fact that political sufferers who at the cost of their personal careers devoted their lives for the people's cause needs to be looked after by the State as one of its welfare responsibility, introduced a scheme namely Political Sufferers Scheme for Post Democratic Political Sufferers in the year 1988 providing for allowances to political sufferers who participated in the democratic movements of post-independence period. Families of the persons who had lost their lives and persons who had served a minimum jail term of six months and whose annual income was less than Rs. 6,400/- were considered as eligible under the scheme. Amongst them were persons whose family members suffered in the Tebhaga movement, the food movement in 1959, the democratic movements in 1966, the land struggles of the 70's and the struggle against emergency. Many of them are not associated with political parties. All of them are very poor, old and some were very ill. Some of them are literally bedridden. Many of them are Dalits and Adivasis.
4. The said scheme was approved in the 54th meeting of the Cabinet Sub Committee, State of West Bengal. Persons eligible under the said scheme to receive monthly allowance were:-
(a) Persons who, as a result of their participation in Freedom Fighting Movements or in the Post-Independence Democratic Movements, have been maimed or disabled.
(b) Persons who as a result of their participation in Freedom Fighting Movements or in Post-Independence Democratic Movements have suffered imprisonment in jails for a period of not less than six months.
(c) The families of the martyr who sacrificed their lives for their participation in the Freedom Fighting Movements or in the Post-Independence Democratic Movements.
(d) Persons who lost their jobs or means of livelihood due to their participation in the movements referred to above.
(e) The families of political sufferers mentioned in the categories (a), (b) and (c) above.
5. It was specifically mentioned in the said scheme that persons not eligible to apply for monthly allowance under the scheme were:-
(a) Those who are receiving Government of India pension either under the Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme or under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme.
(b) Whose income from all sources exceed Rs. 6,000/- per annum.
6. On 10th May, 2000, the General Secretary, State of West Bengal issued a memorandum to the Principal Accountant General (A & E), West Bengal stating that the State Government had decided to enhance with effect from 1st April, 2000 the existing monthly allowance from Rs. 750/- to Rs. 900/-, amongst others, to the political sufferers for their participation in the Post Independent Democratic Movement in the State.
7. On 27th March, 2007, the OSD and Ex Officio Social Secretary, Finance Department of the State of West Bengal issued a memorandum sanctioning monthly allowance to the freedom fighters and their dependents who are receiving pension from the Government of India under Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980, bu
