MURLIDHAR Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Considering the nature of controversy, we have taken up the petitions for final hearing by issuing Rule & making it returnable forthwith by consent of the parties. Accordingly, we have heard the respective Counsel. The arguments advanced are in the backdrop of judgments/orders passed by three different Division Benches here and as such, our attention has not been drawn to any individual or specific challenge. Thus, we are considering the challenge as presented. The petitioners claiming to be a freedom fighters, who allegedly participated in the freedom struggle against the regime of the erstwhile Nizam, assail the orders by which their pension has been discontinued. The State Government accepted the report submitted by Hon. J. Palkar (Retd.) Committee and has passed the impugned orders. The petitioners had applied for Freedom Fighter's pension in accordance with the Government Resolutions dated 5th September, 1992 and 4th July, 1995.

(2.) All the petitioners claim was as an underground volunteers whose cases found favour with the District Honour Committee which recommended the claim of the petitioner. The proposals were, in turn, approved by the High Power Committee and the State Government then had sanctioned the freedom fighters' pension to them.

(3.) Two persons viz. Shri Ajit Murlidhar Deshmukh and Bhaurao Dagadu Paralkar approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 2619 of 2002 in the Public Interest Litigation in which, it was alleged that there are many bogus freedom fighters in Beed District, who were illegally granted pension. This Court, by an interim order appointed a three member Inquiry Committee to hold an inquiry. Said Committee, submitted a report stating that out of 354 freedom fighters from Beed District, 349 were bogus. Some of the persons claiming to be freedom fighters applied for intervention in the said Writ Petition. Their applications having been rejected, they approached the Hon. Apex Court & the Apex Court granted them liberty to file writ petitions challenging the report of the inquiry committee.