UNION OF INDIA Vs. SUDHANGSHU MAITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Counsel for the parties at length. Considering the averments made in the. application for condonation of delay we are satisfied that sufficient grounds have been shown for condoning the delay in preferring the appeal. The delay is, therefore, condoned. The application for condonation of delay is allowed.

(2.) RE :- An appln. for Stay (C. A. N. No. 10767/08): we have heard learned Counsel for the parties. We have also perused the pleadings.

(3.) THE writ petitioner claims to be a freedom fighter. According to the petitioner, he took active part in freedom struggle and remained underground from 2nd October, 1942 to December, 1945. According to the petitioner a search warrant and warrant of arrest was issued against him. On or 13th August, 1981, he applied for pension along with personal knowledge certificate of Sri Rabindra Nath Giri. The petitioner claims to be eligible for pension under the Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension scheme,1980. This Scheme was in furtherance of the Indian independence Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme, 1952 which had been announced earlier by the Central Government to mark the completion of twenty-five years of Indian Independence. The Scheme provides for grant of pension to the freedom fighters. The expressed intention of the scheme was to honour the freedom fighters for their immense personal sacrifice. Claiming to be eligible under the aforesaid scheme, the petitioner submitted an application along with the certificate from an eminent freedom fighter. The application submitted by the writ petitioner was referred by the Central Gpvernment for scrutiny to the State government. The scheme provides that if upon scrutiny and/or verification, the State Government is of the view that the claim is genuine and recommends the pension might be granted to the applicant the central Government shall scrutinize the claim and grant pension to the applicant as per the policy guidelines of the Government in this regard, if the applicant is eligible for pension. The petitioner claims to have taken active part in freedom struggle and remained underground from 2nd october, 1942 till December, 1945. As noticed earlier, according to the petitioner a search warrant and warrant of arrest was issued against him. The petitioner made an application for grant of pension on 13th august, 1981. Along with the application he submitted a personal certificate of Sri Rabindra Nath Giri, who is eligible to grant such a certificate according to a communication dated 18th November, 1989 of the Deputy Secretary, Government of West Bengal, Home (Poll-PSP)Department to the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home affairs, Freedom Fighters' Division. The trial Court notices the findings recorded in numerous judgments including in particular the judgment in gokui Chandra Panja v. Union of India, reported in 1991 (1) C. L. T. 241, where the Court found that the relevant jail record during the period in question was not available. The trial Court also notices that on due scrutiny the State Government recommended the claim of the petitioner by communication dated 18th November, 1989. It is not the case of the appellants either before the learned Single Judge or before us that the recommendation was not based on any material or that it had been made without requisite enquiry. The submissions made by the learned Counsel for the appellants are that since the relevant record was not available, it was necessary for the writ petitioner fo produce the relevant records. The petitioner having failed to produce the records showing that any proclamation declaring him as a proclaimed offender could not be granted pension. It is also submitted that the certificate issued by the eminent freedom fighter ought not to have been relied upon for grant of pension.