IMPORTANT POINTS
The sufferings of the deceased husband of the petitioner/freedom fighter in the jail is authenticated by the 'primary evidence', i.e., jail certificates issued by the concerned jail authorities in respect of the confinement for the period from 28.01.1947 to 16.08.1948. This factual position has been adverted to by this Court in the opening paragraph of Ext.P4 judgment. There is no dispute on the factual position in the counter affidavit. This being the position, the pension that has been given under Ext.P1 Scheme, by passing Ext.P6 order, is on the basis of 'primary evidence', i.e., jail certificate and not on the basis of any secondary evidence of 'co-prisoner's certificate' (CPC) and hence it is not by extending any benefit of doubt, so as to restrict the benefits by giving effect only from the date of the order/ Judgment as stipulated by the Supreme Court in Union of India and Another v. Kaushalaya Devi [(2007) 9 SCC 525].

JUDGMENT :

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.

1. This Writ Appeal arises out of the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 24.5.2018 in W.P.(C)No.33947 of 2011. The said Writ Petition was one filed by the first respondent herein under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents therein to sanction and disburse Dependent Pension under Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 (SSS Pension Scheme) to the writ petitioner from the date of the application, i.e., from 19.3.1998 and disburse the arrears thereon with interest. The further relief sought for is a writ of mandamus declaring that the writ petitioner is entitled to get Dependent Pension under SSS Pension Scheme from the date of application and further direct the respondents therein to issue necessary orders to that effect.

2. By the judgment dated 24.5.2018, W.P.(C) No.33947 of 2011 was allowed by directing the respondents therein, who are the appellants in this Writ Appeal, to disburse the Dependent Pension to the writ petitioner from the date of application, within a period of three months. The reasoning of the learned Judge, contained in the impugned judgment at paragraph 5 reads thus:-

“.............. .............. .............. ............

5. While granting of pension certain amount of discretion is left to the authority. In this case there are records to show that the petitioner [sic: petitioner's husband] suffered imprisonment for two months. There are primary evidence. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that the application was fully without support of any primary evidence. It cannot be said that pension was granted merely based on benefit of doubt. Over all circumstances certainly show that the petitioner can be granted pension from the date of application. I am of the view that the petitioner should be given pension from the date of application.

.............. ............. .............. .............”

3. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment dated 24.05.2018, the official respondents are before this court in this Writ Appeal filed under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958.

4. Heard Sri Jaishankar V. Nair, the learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the appellants, Smt. K.P. Geetha Mani, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent/writ petitioner and also Sri Surin George Ipe, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the second respondent/State.

5. The issue that arises for consideration in this Writ Appeal is as to whether the judgment of the learned single Judge, whereby the appellants are directed to disburse the Dependent Pension under SSS Pension Scheme to the writ petitioner from the date of application can be sustained in law.

6. The pleadings and the materials on record would show that the writ petitioner's husband Sri Chenni Kumaran, who was a participant of the Punnapra-Vayalar Struggle moved Ext.P2 application dated 19.03.1998 for SSS Pension. He was a recipient of pension under the Kerala Freedom Fighters Pension Rules, as evident from Ext.P3 order dated 06.01.1972 of the District Collector, Alappuzha. He died during the pendency of that application. Thereafter, the writ petitioner filed an application for Dependent Pension under SSS Pension Scheme before the 1st appellant, which was originally rejected by Ext.P5 order dated 30.10.2006. The said order was set aside by this court in W.P.(C)No.12775 of 2007 by Ext.P7 judgment dated 28.3.2008, whereby the State Government was directed to reconsider the issue in the light of Ext.P6 report dated 25.11.1971 of the Tahsildar, Cherthala and the other documents relied on by the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner was directed to produce the authenticated copy of Ext.P6 report or any other relevant records before the 2nd respondent/State and on receipt of the same the State was directed to reconsider the matter and forward a verification-cum-entitlement certificate to the Central Government.

7. In Ext.P7 judgment, this court dire