The court emphasized the responsibility of the government to provide pension to freedom fighters and held the conduct of the respondents as unjust.

1. This is an unfortunate case where a person, who has participated in the freedom struggle movement, who is entitled for the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension as per the Pension Scheme of 1980 framed by the Government of India has been dragged by the respondents only to deny his legitimate rights as per the Scheme. This can only be termed as shame and harassment.

2. It is seen that the petitioner has approached this Court atleast two times earlier and inspite of the earlier direction given by this Court to consider the case of the petitioner for the purpose of grant of pension on admitted factual matrix, the 3rd respondent has chosen to pass the impugned order once again stating that the petitioner has not produced any records or certificates to show that either he participated in the freedom movement or he was dismissed from service for such participation and was not reinstated within a period of two years. The petitioner, who is a resident of Mahe, which is in the Union Territory of Puducherrty has participated in the Mahe Liberation Movement apart from Indian Independent Movement. It is due to the said participation, he was dismissed from service while he was working as a Teacher in Sree Narayana Vilasam Senior Basic School, Punnol, which is a recognised Aided Government School in the State of Kerala.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that it is not a dispute, since the same has been settled in earlier round of litigation in W.P.No.3714 of 2010 in the order dated 25.2.2010. For his participation in the freedom struggle, he was brutally attacked by the police as well as the goondas and the employment which he was holding was taken away and he had to live in self-exile on many occasions. To prevent him to be attacked by the ruthless attack by the then rulers, he was stated to have been in the underground for 19 months period. It is stated that to support his involvement in the freedom struggle, he has enclosed a certificate of a co-convict, who was also sentenced to undergo imprisonment along with the petitioner in Alipuram Jail in Bellari from 1942 to 1944. It is also seen that in recognition of the service of the petitioner, the Government of Puducherry, namely the 1st respondent has given Freedom Fighter Pension as per the proceedings dated 14.8.1985 and in the book Published by the Government of Puducherrty (who is who Freedom Fighters), the name of the petitioner finds place. Therefore, as per the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 formulated by the Government of India, especially with reference to clause 2.7, which is as follows,

"2.7. Loss of Government job: A person who lost his Government job for participation in freedom struggle is eligible subject to furnishing of orders of dismissal or removal from service. However, persons who were reinstated in service before expiry of two years from their dismissal of removal from service and were in receipt of benefits or pay and allowances are not eligible for pension"

he was eligible for the Central Government Pension as per the Scheme, since he was dismissed from service as a Teacher and he was not reinstated within two years thereafter and accordingly the petitioner made an application on 19.2.1997. It is stated that the 1st respondent has recommended the name of the petitioner for grant of pension and forwarded the same to the 2nd respondent.

4. Earlier, when the proposal was forwarded by the 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent has rejected the proposal on 14.12.2000, which was challenged by the petitioner by filing Writ Petition No.11273 of 2001 and the Writ Petition came to be disposed of with a direction against the 2nd respondent to consider the representation. Inspite of the subsequent representation made by the petitioner, the claim of the petitioner for payment of pension under the Scheme has not been considered, which has compelled the petitioner to approach this Court by filing W.P.No.3714 of 2010, which came to be disposed of by this