PATTUNDAN KADIYUMMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner says that her husband, late Sri.Mankarathody Mohammed, was a freedom fighter, who had taken part in the Malabar Special Police Strike, which happened in the year 1946. She asserts that her husband was a Constable in the Malabar Special Police Force, Malappuram and that he was dismissed from service of the said Force with effect from 21.04.1946. She has produced on record Ext.P1 in substantiation of these assertions.

(2.) The petitioner submits that the Malabar Special Police Strike is recognized as part of the Indian Independence movement by the State Government and that her husband has already been granted the applicable freedom fighter's pension by the State Government. Her grievance in this writ petition is that in spite of this, the Government of India has refused to give her the eligible pension under the Swathanthra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme and that they have issued Ext.P8 to her, rejecting her claim saying that her husband had not been removed from the service of the Malabar Special Police Force, but that he had resigned. She says that this stand is factually incorrect and she impugns Ext.P8 as being illegal and unlawful.

(3.) When this matter was taken up today, the learned Assistant Solicitor General submitted that Ext.P8 was issued at a time when the policy of the Government was that the person, who had resigned from the service of the Malabar Special Police Force, would not be considered for pension under the Swathanthra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, but that the Government is now reconsidering these issues and that the cases like that of the petitioner are also now being reviewed by them on its merits. He, however, submits that the Central Government has been unable to move forward with respect to the claim of the petitioner because the Government of Kerala has not responded to their letter, a copy of which has been produced on record as Ext.R1(a), seeking certain specific information.