R. MURUGAMALAI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner, being a freedom fighter, continued to fight till his last, though without getting the benefits due to him as he died during the pendency of this writ petition, at the ripe age of 93. The lis is being continued by his grieving wife, who is also stated to be aged about 85 years.

(2.) This is the third round of litigation between the parties. The fight for pension was started by the writ petitioner on 15.08.1981 by applying for pension under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, being a freedom fighter, who went underground during the freedom struggle. The application for pension was rejected on the ground of non availability of adequate documentary evidence. Thereafter, he gave another application on 31.01.1985 along with the earlier certificate issued by one Dr. T. Kannan, freedom fighter and personal knowledge certificate along with proforma from one Thiagi S. Gangadhara Parasuram. Though the personal knowledge certificate and the proforma attached to it was signed by the very same person, as seen from the very same records, there appears to be a little discrepancy in the name in the personal knowledge certificate issued on 20.01.1986. The letter head shows as Thiagi S. Gangadhara Parasuram. It also speaks about the proceedings of the respondent dated 12.07.1972 along with the address. However, in the typed proforma, which was inclusive of both typed and unwritten materials, it has been written as Parasuram Gandharam. There is no dispute over the fact that both have been signed by the very same person as could be seen from the naked eye and they form part of the same document, apart from signed on the very same date viz., 20.01.1986.

(3.) Despite the fact that the application was made in the year 1986, it was kept pending for the reasons best known. Thus, the petitioner has filed writ petition in W.P. No. 17403 of 2009, in which, an order was passed on 04.08.2010 directing the respondent to pass appropriate orders in the light of the discussion made thereunder. This Court has recorded the fact that not one, but four freedom fighters have given certificates in favour of the writ petitioner. The certificate issued by S. Gangadhara Parasuram has been dealt with in the following manner.