CHITTA PARIDA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this writ application challenges the legality of the order dated 17.8.2001, in Annexure -14, in which her claim for payment of Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension (SSSP) on the ground that her deceased husband had gone underground form 7.7.1942 to 7.7.1943 has been rejected.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that her husband late Krushna Chandra Parida participated in the Freedom Movement during the period form 1941 to 1944 and went underground for a period of about one year form 7.7.1942 to 7.7.1943. It is also the case of the petitioner that her late husband was an accused in Case No.712 of 1942 of the Court of Magistrate, Kendrapara, which was disposed of on 7.7.1942. In support of the aforesaid claim, the petitioner annexed jail warrant issued against her late husband. After the Freedom Fighter Pension Scheme was introduced in the year 1972, she submitted an application on 6.1.1989 for grant of pension in her favour on the above grounds. Along with the application, she had produced the legal heir certificate, jail warrant, affidavit and certificates of prominent freedom fighters, namely, Shri Purusottam Naik as well as one Duryodhana Panda, who is also a recipient of the pension. The State Government slept over the matter as a result of which, the petitioner approached this Court in O.J.C. No.5014 of 1994 and the said writ application was disposed of on 12.12.1994 without any effective order as the same was not entertained as premature. After disposal of the said writ application, the petitioner approached different authorities and waiting for almost one more year, she again approached this Court in O.J.C. No.5231 of 1995. The aforesaid writ application was disposed of on 8th September, 1999 directing the authority to take necessary steps for payment of pension within two months form the date of the said order. After disposal of the said writ application, the State Government sanctioned pension in favour of the petitioner and forwarded it to the Central Government for consideration for payment of pension under the Scheme introduced by the Government of India. However, the claim of the petitioner was rejected by the Government of India on 14th July 2000. Challenging the said order, the petitioner again approached this Court in OJC No.1093 of 2001. The aforesaid writ application was disposed of on 7.8.2001 directing the opposite party No.1 to reconsider the application of the petitioner and dispose of the same. After the said order was passed, the application of the petitioner was considered by the opposite party No.1 and was rejected in Annexure -14. The legality of the order in Annexure -14 is under challenge before this Court.

(3.) MUCH reliance was placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Annexure -1, a jail warrant, Annexure -4, a certificate issued by Purusottam Naik -ex -MLA, Kendrapara as well as the certificate issued by one Duryodhana Panda, who is in receipt of the said pension. Relying on the aforesaid three documents, it was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said documents clearly indicate that the late husband of the petitioner participated in the freedom struggle and accordingly she is entitled to the pension under the SSSP Scheme. Annexure -4 is the certificate issued by Shri Purusottam Naik on 1.1.90. In the certificate, it is mentioned that the late husband of the petitioner worked with him for liberation and he particularly worked during Quit India Movement in the year 1942 and suffered hardship, ill -treatment at the hands of the Britishers. It is also certified that during absence of the said Purusottam Naik for more than 2 years, the late husband of the petitioner was convicted under D.I. Act. Form the certificate issued by Duryodhana Panda as mentioned above, it appears that the late husband of the petitioner remained underground for more than six months form 7.7.1942 to 7.7.1943. Annexure -1, a jail warrant indicates that a warrant had been issued against the late husband of the petitioner form the Court of the Magistrate, Kendrapara in Case No.712 of 1942 and the said case was disposed of on 7.7.1942. Form the Annexure -14, it appears that all the three documents were taken into consideration and the reasons rejecting the claim are that as per the certificate issued by the Krushna Chandra Parida, the late husband of the petitioner participated in the Quite India Movement which started sometime in August 1942 whereas the certificate issued by the Duryodhana Panda shows that the late husband of the petitioner had remained underground for a period form 7.7.1942 to 7.7.1943. Considering the same, it was observed by the opposite party No.1 that even if the late husband of the petitioner remained underground, it could not be because of Quit India Movement. The jail warrant was also considered by the opposite party No.1 and the same was not accepted for the purpose of grant of pension on the ground that the said case having been concluded on 7.7.1942, it has no relevancy to the period for which the late husband of the petitioner is said to have gone underground. On examination of the aforesaid three documents, it appears that there is confusion with regard to the claim as to whether the late husband of the petitioner went underground for Quit India Movement or for any other reason. The Quit India Movement having started in August 1942, the late husband of the petitioner could not have gone underground with effect form 7.7.1942 for the above movement.