A liberal approach to evidence is essential in pension claims under the Swatantrata Sainik Pension Scheme, ensuring entitlement is determined based on substantial participation evidence.

JUDGMENT : 

G.S. SANDHAWALIA, CJ..

1. The present appeals by the Union of India & State of Himachal Pradesh, have been preferred against the judgment dated 02.01.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 10620 of 2021, titled Mahanti Devi vs. Union of India & Anr. filed by the widow of the Freedom Fighter, who is asking for pension under the Swatantrata Sainik Pension Scheme, 1980 from the date of her application and had challenged the rejection order dated 11.04.2007 [Annexure PK in the writ file] and prayed for payment of arrears of pension alongwith interest @ 12% and had also asked the State to decide her application within a period of three months as per law laid down in Mukand Lal Bhandari vs. Union of India, AIR 1993 SC 2127.

2. Learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and directed that the financial assistance be granted under the updated Scheme i.e. “Scheme for the Grant of Financial Assistance by the Government of Himachal Pradesh to the Freedom Fighters of Himachal Pradesh” w.e.f. 01.01.2012, which is the date of knowledge. Resultantly directions were issued to grant pension both under the Central Scheme and State Scheme and the findings were recorded that there was no material to show that the husband of the petitioner, namely, Teg Singh had not undergone sufferings because of his externment and other affidavits of the Freedom Fighters.

3. Apparently, in spite of lament expressed by the Apex Court in Mukand Lal Bhandari’s case regarding the high objective of the Scheme keeping in view the fact that it was introduced to give benefits to Freedom Fighters to honour and mitigate the sufferings of those who had given their all for the country. The State and the Union of India still continue to litigate and have objected to the directions issued by the learned Single Judge.

4. In Gurdial Singh vs. Union of India & Others, (2001) 8 SCC 8, it was noticed that a liberal and not a technical approach is required to be followed while determining the merits of the case of a person seeking pension under the Scheme and it was on the basis of evidence that is probabilised and a presumption is required to be drawn in his favour unless the same is rebutted by cogent, reasonable and reliable evidence. The hyper-technical approach was thus castigated while granting the relief of pension both by the State of Punjab and the Union of India which had been rejected in the said case on the ground that discrepancies and contradictions regarding the fact of joining Indian National Army in September, 1942, were found, inspite of the fact that an original driving licence issued at Bangkok had been relied upon by holding that getting the record from a Foreign country is very cumbersome and expensive process.

5. The perusal of the order of rejectment dated 11.04.2007 which came to be passed by the respondents [Annexure PK], which was in pursuance of an earlier direction to consider the case in Civil Writ Petition No. 374 of 2000, decided on 02.01.2006.

6. Thus, the reasoning given to reject the said claim which was to be considered in view of the law laid down in Mukand Lal Bhandari’s case are as under:-

“(i) He has not furnished any acceptable evidence duly verified by the State Government, in support of his claimed suffering of externment (as indicated in para 2 above).
(ii) He has not furnished a valid Non-availability of Records Certificate (NARC) from the State Government (i.e., the competent authority) containing all ingredients prescribed therefor (as indicated in para 2 above).
(iii) In the absence of valid NARC, secondary evidence, i.e. Personal Knowledge Certificates (PKCs) cannot be considered and are not acceptable. The PKC submitted by him from Shri Sant Ram, Advocate, Former Home Minister-cum-Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur State, has however been scrutinized. The same is not acceptable.as the certifier has not furnished any record/evidence of his own duration of suffering in connection with freedom movement (i.e., he has fu