K ARUMUGAM, SIRUKOODALPATTI POST, THIRUPATHUR TALUK, SIVAGANGA DISTRICT Vs. UNION OF INDIA, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GRIGH MANTRALAYA, NEW DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed this writ petition praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to grant Freedom Fighter's pension to the petitioner in accordance with Swathanthra Sainik Samman Pension Rules.

(2.) From the facts and circumstances of the case as traced from the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition what comes to be known is that the petitioner was in the Indian National Army as a Sepoy at Gaughsala Training Camp till the war was over and returned to India in the year 1946 with the help of INA Relief Committee; that the petitioner was in the INA for nearly about three years and suffered political imprisonment; that the All India Congress Committee granted a certificate dated 7.8.1968 certifying that the petitioner was a member of INA and a political sufferer; that the INA at Madras has granted the INA Personnel History Sheet; that the State Government recognised his service and granted pension vide F.F.P.O.No.2806/68, dated 8.11.1968; that even today the petitioner is receiving the State Government Freedom Fighter's Pension; that the petitioner applied for grant of Central Government Pension under the Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme 1972 by his application dated 24.7.1972 to the respondent and a representation was also made on 11.9.1991 but there is no reply and hence this writ petition.

(3.) In the counter filed by the respondent, it is stated that INA comprised of personnel who joined from British India Army and had taken oath of allegiance to the crown and others, who were recruited locally were called civilians; that the petitioner's claim is that he was a civilian; that after the defeat of Japan, the Allied Forces took over the camps where INA Personnel were stationed; that in the camps the segregation took place in which those who were from British Indian Army were taken prisoners as they had acted against their oath of allegiance but the civilians had not been taken and they were not detained or imprisoned by the Allied Forces and according to information available with the respondent, no civilian was detained or imprisoned.