The main legal point established in the judgment is that entitlement to pension under the SSS Pension Scheme should be determined based on the date of the original application, as per the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Mukund Lal Bhandari & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., AIR 1993 SC 2127.

JUDGMENT

1. The Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief:

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly please to quash the 7 letter dated 18.09.2020 and by respondent No.3 and modify the letter dated 03.09.2013 directing the respondent directing the respondents to grant the SSS pension to husband of the petitioner Late Ram Prasad Nayak from date of application I.e. 31.03.1982 instead 14.06.2013 and arrear from 31.03.1982 to 13.06.2013 alongwith 18% interest pa and also be directed to respondents and such arrear also be paid to petitioner being a wife of Late Freedom Fighter Ram Prasad Nayak and heavy cost upon the respondent No.1 to 3 also be imposed and respondent No.4 also be directed to release the health allowance/pension to petitioner as arrear since 31:03.1982 to 13.06.2013 with future health 7 allowances."

2. Shorn of details, the facts leading to the instant writ petition are as follows:

i. It is stated that the husband of the Petitioner late Shri Ram Prasad Nayak S/o Late Acche Lal Nayak, R/o Village Satdhara, P.O. Rajnagar, District Madhubani, Bihar had participated in the Quit India Movement, 1942 and criminal cases were registered against him for participating in the freedom struggle.

ii. It is stated that the Government of India brought out the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as `SSS Pension Scheme') to honour the freedom fighters.

iii. Under the said pension scheme, pension could be granted to the freedom fighters, his family (if the freedom fighter is not alive), i.e., mother, father, widow/widower, if he/she has not since remarried and unmarried daughters. It is stated that not more than one eligible dependent can be granted pension under the said scheme and if there are more than one dependents, the sequence of eligibility will be widow/widower, unmarried daughters, mother and father.

iv. Under the said scheme, a freedom fighter is a person, who has suffered minimum imprisonment for a period of six months in the mainland jails before Independence. Ex-INA personnel are also eligible for pension even if the imprisonment/detention suffered by them was outside India. Pension was also to be granted if a person has undergone more than six months imprisonment or he/she had been declared as a proclaimed offender for an offence of being participating in the freedom movement or on whom an award of arrest or head was announced.

v. It is stated that a criminal case had been registered against the Petitioner's husband and his colleagues which was registered as GR No. 819/1942 and the husband of the Petitioner Late Shri Ram Prasad Nayak was declared as an absconder and his name figured in the list of Proclaimed Offenders.

vi. After scheme was announced, the Petitioner's husband applied for pension under the SSS Pension Scheme as laid down by the Central Government on 31.03.1982. Admittedly, the claim of the Petitioner's husband was received by the Ministry of Home Affairs through letter dated 15.10.2007 and since there were some clarifications which were sought by the Central Government from the State Government and finally on 14.06.2013 the State Government made its final recommendation on the claim of Petitioner's husband.

vii. A letter dated 03.09.2013 was issued by the Government of India to the Pay & Accounts Officer, Ministry of Home Affairs for grant of pension to the Petitioner's husband under the SSS Pension Scheme.

viii. The widow of Late Shri Ram Prasad Nayak, i.e., the Petitioner herein, claims that the pension should be granted from the date of the application, i.e., 31.03.1982 and not from the date of appeal by the Central Government which is 03.09.2013.

3. Notice was issued in the matter on 04.05.2022 and counter affidavit has been filed.

4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that husband of the Petitioner was a freedom fighter and he was entitled for pension at least from the date of his application, if no