JUDGMENT

A. K. PATNAIK, J. — Freedom Fighters' Pension Scheme, 1972 was framed by the Government of India. The Scheme provided for grant of pension to living freedom fighters, their families if they are no more alive, and to the families of martyrs. Under the scheme, not more than one member of a family was to be granted pension. The husband of the petitioner late Rangadhar Panda was granted such pension at the rate of Rs. 200/- per month and he was draw¬ing the same. On 4.4.1975 the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, addressed a communication to the Accountant Gener¬al, Orissa stating therein that the pension sanctioned provision¬ally in favour of the petitioner has been suspended. On the same day, a memorandum was also issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, suspending the pension of Rs. 200/- per month provisionally sanctioned in favour of late Rangadhar Panda. By the said memorandum late Rangadhar Panda was asked to show cause as to why provisional pension granted to him should not be cancelled on the grounds indicated in the said memorandum and also to show cause as to why the Government should not take appropriate steps for recovery of the same. The communication and the memorandum dated 4.4.1975 of the Government of India, Minis¬try of Home Affairs, copies of which have been annexed as Annex¬ures-3 and 4, have been challenged in this writ petition by the petitioner.

2. Mr. B. N. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that at the time of application for such Freedom Fight¬ers' Pension, late Rangadhar Panda had furnished certificates of an Ex - M.L.A., Shri Dwarikanath Das and an Ex-M.P., Shri Dhara¬nidhar Jena, certifying that late Rangadhar Panda was a co-pris¬oner with them and the aforesaid certificates were treated as proof of the fact that late Rangadhar Panda was a Freedom Fighter for the purpose of grant of pension under the Freedom Fighters' for the purpose of grant of pension under the Freedom Fighters' Pen¬sion Scheme, 1972. He further submitted that there was no jail record available in proof of the fact that late Rangadhar Panda has been in jail at Balasore for more than six months. He submit¬ted that all that is available is a certified copy of record in the District Record Room from the Court of the Magistrate First Class, Babu S. Mohapatra, which would go to show that late Ran¬gadhar Panda had been sentenced to R.I for eight months under Section 117 I.P.C. and Section 9 (A) of the Salt Act. Mr. Panda referred to various instances given in the rejoinder affidavit where other persons, namely, Gourahari Das, Birabar Das, Chintama¬ni Naik had been granted freedom fighters' pension on the basis of similar certified copies of the records of the District Record- room showing conviction and imprisonment for more than six months. According to Mr. Panda, the impugned communication and memorandum dated 4.4.1975 suspending the provisional pension granted to late Rangadhar Panda are arbitrary, unfair and con¬trary to the Freedom Fighters' Pension Scheme, 1972 and are liable to be quashed.

3. Mr. S. K. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the Union of India, on the other hand, relied on the grounds given in the impugned memorandum dated 4.4.1975 for suspension of the provisional pension granted to late Rangadhar Panda as well as the affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India and submitted that the suspension of the provisional pension in favour of late Rangadhar Panda by the impugned memorandum and the communication was justified. He also submitted that the State Government also recommended for suspension of the provisional pension granted in favour of late Rangadhar Panda. He finally argued that in any case, late Rangadhar Panda should have filed a show cause in response to the impugned memorandum dated 4.4.1975 but no such show cause was filed and instead the petitioner has approached this Court in the present writ petition in the year 2000 against the impugned co