RAM BARAN THAKUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PURSUANT to the direction given on 6.8.99 a supplementary counter affidavit has come from the State Government. Let the same be accepted and kept on the record.

(2.) THE petitioner 's application for grant of freedom fighter 's pension under the Swatantra Sainani Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 has been rejected by the competent authority in the Central Government by letter dated 30.6.93 (An -nexure 10). The reason for rejecting the petitioner 's claim as stated in that letter is that though the petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the Jehanabad court, according to his claim he served out his sentence of imprisonment in the Patna Jail. The concerned authority has made the observation that it did not stand to reason why the petitioner served out the sentence at the Patna Jail and atleast some period of the sentence should have been spent in Jehanabad jail because he was convicted and sentenced by the Jehanabad court.

(3.) ON the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the petitioner the State was directed to file a supplementary counter affidavit. The supplementary counter affidavit filed today brings on record letter no. 4264, dated 3.9.99 from the I.G. Prisons, Bihar. In this letter, it is stated that the records pertaining to keeping the petitioner at Central Jail, Patna in 1942 is no longer available. As regards the petitioner 's claim that in 1942 political prisoners were lodged only at Patna and Bhagalpur camp jails, it is stated in that letter that the political prisoners were kept at Central Jail, Bhagalpur and Central Jail, Patna. A copy of that letter is at Annexure -H to the supplementary counter affidavit. The I.G. Prisons thus clearly supports the case of the petitioner and it seems that this aspect of the matter was overlooked by the competent authority in the Central Government and the claim of the petitioner was, thus, rejected on a misapprehension of fact. The order passed by the competent authority in the Central Government rejecting the petitioner 's claim for pension is therefore set aside and the competent authority is directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner in the light of the stand taken by the State Govt. in the aforesaid matter. A final decision on the petitioner 's claim must be taken and the petitioner be duly intimated within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.