The main legal point established is that widowed/divorced daughters of freedom fighters are entitled to the benefit of the Pension Scheme under para 5.2.5, as interpreted by the Punjab & Haryana High Court and Calcutta High Court, and affirmed by the Supreme Court.

JUDGMENT

V. Kameswar Rao, J. - This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:-

"In view of the above, it is, therefore, humbly and respectfully prayed that in the facts and circumstances, placed before this Hon'ble Court, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to:

a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to the respondent to transfer of Freedom Fighter Pension granted under the scheme namely "SWATANTRATA SAINIK SAMMAN PENSION SCHEMEN" to the late Sh. K. Appa Rao PPO No. MHAFF9801528 of Visakhapatnam, in the name of sole dependent widow daughter Smt. Kolli Indira Kumari who is petitioner in the present case, with all arrears, in the interest of justice;

b) Quash / set aside the impugned order dated 12.02.2020 communicated to the petitioner by the Government of India, Ministry of Home affairs vide its letter no. F.No.119/Gen/AP/07/2020-FF(SZ) dated 12.02.2020;

c) Pass any other further order/s as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice."

2. It is the case of the petitioner and so contended by Mr. Mahesh Kumar Tiwari, her counsel that in the year 1972 the respondent No.1-Government of India had, during 25th Anniversary of the Independence framed a central scheme for grant of pension to freedom fighters and their families from central revenue. The Scheme commenced from August 15, 1972 and provided for grant of pension to living freedom fighters and their families and if they are no more alive, to the families of martyrs. The benefit of the said Scheme was extended with effect from August 01, 1980 to all the freedom fighters as a token of 'SAMMAN' to them under the scheme namely "SWATANTRATA SAINIK SAMMAN PENSION SCHEME" ('Pension Scheme', for short).

3. The father of the petitioner was granted the benefits of the said Scheme. He died on November 01, 2019 leaving behind his widowed daughter, the petitioner herein, who is physically handicapped and mentally challenged and unemployed and also bed ridden. It is the case of the petitioner that the husband of the petitioner late Sh. Kolli Lakshmana Rao working in private sector had also died on October 26, 2000 and after her husband's demise, the petitioner was fully dependent upon her late father Sh.K.Appa Rao. It is contended by Mr. Tiwari that the petitioner being the daughter of K.Appa Rao, was given the benefit of CGHS.

4. After the death of her father, the petitioner filed an application on November 11, 2019 with all necessary documents for disbursal of pension to her, in Bank of Baroda Visakhapatnam. On receipt of the application, the Bank of Baroda vide its letter dated December 17, 2019 has requested the respondent No.1 to transfer the freedom fighter pension to the petitioner. On February 12, 2020, the respondent No.1 sent a communication to the petitioner rejecting the request of the petitioner in terms of para 5.2.5 of the revised policy guidelines which states that widowed / divorced daughter is not eligible for Pension.

5. According to Mr. Tiwari, the only ground for the respondent No.1 to deny the petitioner the benefit of the Pension Scheme is that being the widowed daughter of the freedom fighter, she is not entitled to the same, is contrary to the settled position of law inasmuch as para 5.2.5 of the Pension Scheme has been interpreted to include widowed / divorced daughters also. In this regard, he has relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Khazani Devi vs. Union of India and Ors. LPA No. 1721/2015 decided on July 29, 2016. According to him, the said judgment was taken in appeal before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP as well as the Review Petition on September 27, 2019 and January 19, 2021 respectively. He also relied upon the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Smt. Kamlesh v. Union of India