NITYABALA DAS (SMT.) Vs. UNION OF INDIA (UOI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ Petitioner stated that Late Jiban Das, husband of the Petitioner was a freedom fighter and went under ground for more than six months in order to work secretly for the Freedom Movement of India under the leadership of Rabindranath Giri, who suffered imprisonment for more than five years. The said act of the husband of the Petitioner of going under -ground was neither of his own accord nor for fear of police fortune but was exclusively for continuance of his service to the country under guidance of the said leader. After the declaration of Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the said Scheme), the husband of the Petitioner made an application for grant of pension under the said Scheme enclosing a certificate of Rabindranath Giri who was eligible to issue certificate as per the provisions of the said Scheme. On September 21, 1989 after due approval by the District Level Advisory Committee, Midnapore, the application of the husband of the Petitioner was recommended and sent by the Deputy Secretary, Government of West Bengal, to the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Freedom Fighters Division, New Delhi. Thereafter, the Under -Secretary to the Government of India by letter being Annex. P -2 to the writ petition conveyed the sanction of the President to grant provisional pension @ Rs. 750/ - per month to the husband of the Petitioner. During 1990 the Audit Officer, Central, Calcutta forwarded the P.P.O. to the Treasury Officer issued in favour of the husband of the Petitioner. However, the husband of the Petitioner could not draw his pension as he expired on December 6, 1984.

(2.) In such circumstances, the Petitioner prayed for grant of family pension as per the Scheme and accordingly the Additional District Magistrate (Treasury) Midnapore by a Memo dated January 21, 1992 sent a verification of claim of the Petitioner to the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs requesting payment of family pension as admissible to the Petitioner under the said Scheme. Thereafter, the District Magistrate forwarded the cases of family pension along with the case of the Petitioner to the Treasury Officer II, Midnapore for information and necessary action. As no pension was granted, the writ Petitioner on September 6, 1993 made a representation to the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs with a request to sanction family pension in her favour. But as no reply was forthcoming, the writ Petitioner moved a writ petition being Company No. 11342 (W) of 1996 which was disposed of August 28, 1996 of by the following order -

(3.) Thereafter, the Petitioner received a copy of the letter dated September 19, 1996 addressed by Under -Secretary, Government of India to the Pay and Accounts Officer (Pension and. Misc.), Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi intimating that in compliance with the High Court directions the President had sanctioned provisional family pension with effect from November 30, 1989 subject to review on the basis of revised verification report based on official records from the State Government. It was further stated that the pension was liable to cancellation, modification without any notice if it was found that the sanction was on mistaken ground and false information. The Petitioner, thereafter, complied with all formalities and accordingly a P.P.O. no bearing M.H.A.F.F. 9605128 was allotted in favour of the Petitioner. By letter dated November 19, 1996 the Pay and Accounts Officer directed the Pay and Accounts Office to make arrangement for payment of pension in favour of the Petitioner and the Petitioner started drawing such pension with effect from November 30, 1989.