Back
2010 Supreme(Gau) 565
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (AGARTALA BENCH)
Iqbal Ahmed Ansari and C.R. Sarma, JJ.
Rani Bala Saha and Ors. - Appellants
Vs.
Union of India (UOI) and Ors. - Respondent
W.A. Nos. 06, 09 and 10 of 2005
Decided On: 12.08.2010
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: A.L. Saha, Adv.
For Respondents/Defendant: A. Lodh and T.D. Majumder, Advs.
Headnote:
Constitution of IndiA, 1950 – Article 226 - Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme, 1972 - Freedom fighters pension - Documentary evidence - Cancelled the pension - Challenged - Writ appeals, arising out of said cordon judgment and order carry common question of law on almost identical factual premises and represented by same sets of Advocates for sake of convenience and as agreed to by learned Counsels representing parties above three writ appeals have been heard together and are taken up for disposal by this common judgment and order - Government of India introduced a scheme known for grant of pension to freedom fighters or in case of death, to their families - Scheme provided income bar indicating therein that freedom fighters having annual income less than from all sources would be entitled to pension if he/she had suffered imprisonment for at least six months for their participation in freedom struggle - Persons claiming to have suffered imprisonment for six months for purpose of pension are required to furnish Prison document viz. certificate from concerned Jail authority - This scheme was replaced by Anr. Scheme called Swatantrata Sainik Sanman Pension Scheme w.e.f. thereby removing income ceiling and liberalizing term of imprisonment from six months to three months in case of woman freedom fighters and Ors. belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe community - Held, Writ Petitioners-Appellants cases for pension as Committee after due scrutiny did not find claims to be genuine - In their affidavit-in-opposition, Union of India and the State contended that claim of writ Petitioners-Appellants were not found genuine by Review Committee and also that, after giving reasonable opportunity of show cause provisional pension of husband of writ Petitioners-Appellants were cancelled - It is found that the provisional pension was cancelled for want of necessary documentary evidence as prescribed by Scheme and though the Government was all along ready to reconsider the matter, subject to production of required document writ Petitioners or their husbands failed to substantiate that their claims by furnishing acceptable documents/certificate - Therefore, it appears that sufficient opportunity was given to husbands of the writ Petitioners-Appellants to show cause as to why provisional pension should not be cancelled for want of necessary document - As deceased husbands of writ Petitioners-Appellants or writ Petitioners-Appellants failed to produce required documents Respondents committed no illegality by cancelling provisional pension granted to husbands of the writ Petitioners-Appellants for want of necessary documentary evidence - As discussed above in Court considered opinion the cancellation order in respect of pension was passed after giving opportunity to show cause and therefore there was no violation of natural justice - Appeal dismissed
C.R. Sarma, J.
1. The above three writ appeals involve the question regarding entitlement of freedom fighters' pension, under the Freedom Fighters' Pension Scheme, 1972, by the Freedom Fighters and the members of their family. The common judgment and order, dated 13.12.2004, passed by the learned Single Judge in (1) W.P.(C) No. 276 of 1999, filed by Smti Rani Bala Saha, (2) W.P.(C) No. 281 of 1999, filed by Smti Hemlata Saha, (3) W.P.(C) No. 282 of 1999, filed by Smti Parul Rani Saha and in nine other writ petitions filed by Ors., is in challenge in this set of writ appeals. As this set of writ appeals, arising out of the said cordon judgment and order, carry common question of law, on almost identical factual premises and represented by the same sets of Advocates, for sake of convenience and as agreed to by the learned Counsels representing the parties, the above three writ appeals have been heard together and are taken up for disposal by this common judgment and order.
2. The Government of India introduced a scheme, known as Freedom Fighters' Pension Scheme, 1972, for grant of pension to the freedom fighters or in case of death, to their families. The scheme provided income bar indicating, therein, that freedom fighters having annual income less than Rs. 5,000/- from all sources would be entitled to pension if he/she had suffered imprisonment for at least six months for their participation in the freedom struggle. Persons claiming to have suffered imprisonment for six months, for the purpose of pension, are required to furnish Prison document viz. certificate from the concerned Jail authority. District Magistrate or the State. In case of non-availability of such certificate, a co-prisoner's certificate from the sitting MP or MLA or from an Ex-MP or Ex-MLA specifying the jail period, undergone by the person concerned is required to be furnished. This scheme was replaced by Anr. scheme, called 'Swatantrata Sainik Sanman Pension Scheme (hereinafter called the 'SSSPS'), w.e.f. 01.08.1980, thereby removing the income ceiling and liberalizing the term of imprisonment from six months to three months in case of woman freedom fighters and Ors. belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe community. The requirement of Jail certificate or in the event of non-availability of such certificate, a co-prisoner's certificate, from at least two prominent freedom fighters remained unchanged. However, it was provided that a single certificate from MP, MLA or Ex-MP or Ex-MLA would serve the purpose.
Accordingly, the writ Petitioners-Appellants' husbands (since deceased) applied for pension, under the said scheme, and the Govt. of India granted them provisional pension. Subsequently, the said pension was kept under suspension and notices were issued to the applicants asking them to submit representation as to why the pension should not be cancelled for want of sufficient documentary evidence of suffering imprisonment and due to failure of the applicants, to finish required documents, the Government of India cancelled the pension granted to the husbands of the writ Petitioners-Appellants. Being aggrieved, the writ Petitioners-Appellants filed individual writ petitions and the learned Single Judge, by the common judgment and order aforesaid, dismissed the writ petitions. Challenging the said order of dismissal, the writ Petitioners have come up with the present writ appeals.
3. In order to appreciate the individual cases, it would be appropriate to, briefly, state the writ Petitioners-Appellants' individual cases as follows:
Writ Appeal No. 06 of 2005 (In W.P.(C) No. 276 of 1999)
According to the writ Petitioner-Appellant, her husband. Late Birendra Chandra Saha was an ex freedom fighter and he suffered imprisonment for 9(nine) months, during the period 1930-31, in Dacca Jail in connection with Civil Disobedience Movement. Political pension having been applied for, by the writ Petitioner-Appellant's husband, the Govt. of India, under the Free
