STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANOTHER Vs. RAJESHWARI SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application, seeking condonation of the delay in filing the special appeal, is not opposed by Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner, and the delay is, therefore, condoned.

(2.) This appeal is preferred against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No.272 of 2018 dated 15.02.2018. The State of Uttarakhand is in appeal before us aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, whereby a writ of certiorari was issued quashing the impugned orders dated 05.05.2017 and 28.11.2017 with costs of Rs.3.50 lakhs @ Rs.1.00 lakh per decade to be paid to the widow/petitioner for the harassment which her late husband, a freedom fighter, and she had suffered at the hands of the State agency; a writ of mandamus was issued to the respondents to forthwith start paying the freedom fighter pension, with all benefits as admissible to the dependants, without any further delay to the petitioner who is a 91 years old widow of late Mr. Satyeshwar Sharma; and to further pay the entire arrears of freedom fighter pension, which was otherwise payable to the late husband and his widow after his death, within one month from the date of passing of the order.

(3.) Facts, to the limited extent necessary, are that the petitioner, and after his demise his widow, have been running from pillar to post seeking grant of freedom fighter pension, under the 1975 Rules, ever since 05.03.1981. They invoked the jurisdiction of this Court by filing Writ Petition (M/S) No.2313 of 2014 which was disposed of, by order dated 29.03.2017, directing the State Government to decide the case of the petitioner in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, but within a period of four weeks' from the date of production of a certified copy of the order. The petitioner preferred Special Appeal No.131 of 2017 which was disposed of by order dated 26.04.2017 holding that no interference was called for with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. However, since the period stipulated by the learned Single Judge to decide the appellant's case had elapsed, the State Government was directed to take a final decision in the matter within two weeks from the date of the order. This order of the Division Bench dated 26.04.2017 was passed, after taking note of the submission of Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel, that the Freedom Fighter Pension Rules, 1975 (hereinafter called the "1975 Rules"), was amended, and Rule 12 thereof was deleted on 31.01.2014 after the second respondent had recommended the appellant's claim for grant of freedom fighter pension by his letter dated 14.08.2013.