IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD.

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.24557 of 2012 Date of Order: 13.03.2026 Between :

1. Manikonda Chiranjeevulu (Died)

and Another .… Petitioners.

And

1. Government of India, Rep. by its Under Secretary, and Another .… Respondents.

ORDER:

Heard Ms.P.V.V.B. Rajeswari, learned counsel representing Sri Kowturu Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms.Haritha Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent No.2.

2. This Writ Petition is filed seeking consideration of the petitioner’s claim for grant of pension under the Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme – 1980 (for short ‘the Scheme’), pursuant to the re-verification report sent by respondent No.2 in the month of November, 2010.

3. At the time of filing of the Writ Petition, the petitioner No.1 was aged about 83 years. During pendency of the Writ Petition, since petitioner No.1 is deceased, petitioner No.2, his wife, is impleaded as his legal representative.

4. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner No.1 was a Freedom Fighter, fought against the Nizam Government for its merger into Union of India and he participated in the freedom movement and went underground during 1947-48 at Kota Venkatapuram Camp under the leadership of one Sri Kalva Komuraiah, who is a Camp in-charge.

5. It is further the case of the petitioners that as per the Scheme formulated by the Government of India, the petitioner No.1 had applied for grant of pension in the year 1996 duly complying with all the necessary conditions, but the respondents have failed to take proper action till now, which action is illegal and arbitrary.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that even if the petitioner No.1 is no more, petitioner No.2, being the wife of petitioner No.1 is entitled for the benefits under the Scheme.

7. The respondent No.1 filed a counter-affidavit stating that during the pendency of the Writ Petition, the re-verification report forwarded by the State Government has been examined as per the Scheme and the guidelines/instructions issued thereunder, the claim of petitioner No.1 has been rejected vide speaking order dated 21/28.09.2012.

8. The respondent No.1 further stated that in June 1985, the Government of India has decided to treat the sufferings in a border camp at par with underground sufferings as defined in the Scheme and that even after the recognition of the border camp sufferings in the Hyderabad Liberation Movement to be at par with underground suffering for the purpose of Samman Pension under the Scheme, none of the participants would have qualified for grant of pension as their sufferings could not have been substantiated by the normal evidentiary requirements of the Scheme. Therefore, non-official Special Screening Committee (headed by Sri Govind Bhai Shroff) was constituted to identify and recommend the border camps and the participants. The Committee had made an extensive tour of the regions comprising the erstwhile State of Hyderabad with regard to various camps from which the armed struggle was waged.

9. It is further contended that in December, 1996, the Committee was reconstituted under the Chairmanship of Sri N.Giri Prasad, Member of Parliament and on his death in April, 1997, Sri Ch.Rajeswar Rao, MLA, Andhra Pradesh, was appointed as Chairman. Under his leadership, 100% re-verification of all cases including those which are already sanctioned were examined.

10. It is further contended that Para 5(i) of the Guidelines under letter dated 10.09.2009 provides that the eligibility of the applicant should be judged strictly with reference to the claims made in the original application and if sufferings in the border camp has not been claimed, the claim should be rejected and not recommended. It has been observed from his original application that Sri Manikonda Chiranjeevulu has not claimed suffering in a border camp and