BUDHI SAGAR NAUTIYAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner in this petition filed under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India has prayed for quashing of the order of Respondent No. 1 declining to grant the pension under the Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 1972 scheme) as conveyed to him through letter Annexure P-18 dated 7th January, 1977 and subsequent orders even refusing to allow the pension under the Swatantarta Sainik Samman Pension Scheme 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 1980 scheme) conveyed to him through letters Annexure P-22 dated 30th July, 1984 and Annexure P-23 dated 25th February, 1986 and praying for suitable directions directing Respondent No. 1 to grant him pension under 1972 scheme as liberalised by the 1980 scheme and for release of arrears of pension becoming due and payable from the date of application.

(2.) It is the Petitioner's case that at the very young age of 19-20 years, he joined the freedom struggle of the country and suffered tortures and humiliations at the hands of police of the then State of Tehri Garhwal in Uttar Pradesh and later on having taken part in the movement for the merger of erstwhile princely States of Bilaspur, Suket and Mandi in Himachal Pradesh with the Indian Union after 15th August, 1947 as a member of Praja Mandal Movement. According to him, during the freedom struggle be suffered imprisonment and was also externed firstly from Tehri Garhwal and later from Bilaspur, Suket and Mandi. The period of jail suffering and externment combined together being more than six months, as such, he was entitled to the grant of pension under the 1972 scheme, for which purpose on 2nd January, 1974 an application was moved by him and was sent to the Deputy Commissioner of Mandi and on 18th March, 1974 to the Deputy Commissioner, Tehri Garhwal with a request to forward the same to Respondent No. 2, but his claim for grant of pension was wrongly rejected by conveying to him the decision of Respondent No. 1 through letter Annexure P-18 dated 7th January, 1977 stating that no formal application on the prescribed form had been submitted before the last date, namely, 31st March. 1974 and also that the jail suffering was less than six months, as such, the Petitioner's case was not covered under 1972 scheme. The Petitioner took up the matter again with Respondent No. 1 pointing out that the application, in fact, had been made within time on 2nd January, 1974 and his case was fully covered, but the claim was again negatived by Respondent No. 1 when communication Annexure P-22 dated 30th July, 1984 from Respondent No. 1 was received by him. By filing the writ petition, the Petitioner prayed for quashing of the orders conveyed to him through communications Annexure P-18 and Annexure P-22 with a prayer to direct Respondent No. 1 to pay him the pension by working it out under 1972 scheme from 2nd January, 1974 and under 1980 scheme from the date of coming into force of the said scheme.

(3.) The writ petition was presented on 26th December, 1984. On 24tb June, 19&5 when after notice, the petition came up for admission, the Court passed the following order: