Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Basantabai W/o Maniklal Jaiswal, filed a writ petition seeking adjudication of her deceased husband's application for freedom fighter's pension. Her husband had participated in the Hyderabad Liberation Movement as an underground freedom fighter from 1946 to 1948 and died on 28/1/1999. He first applied for pension in 1985, which was rejected on 26-5-1995/24-7-1995 as time-barred. He reapplied on 11/8/1995 and was asked to produce documents, which he did on 24/10/1996. When the second application was not decided, he filed Writ Petition No. 939/1998, which was disposed of on 18/11/1998 with a direction to decide within four months. The State Government rejected the application on 27/6/2000 for non-compliance with the Government Resolution dated 4/7/1995. Unaware of this rejection, the Collector issued a notice on 29/11/2006 calling for a meeting, prompting the petitioner to file the present petition in 2008. The petitioner argued that the 1985 application should be considered under the Government Resolution dated 5/9/1992, not the 1995 Resolution. The court held that since the application was made in 1985, it must be considered under the 1992 Resolution, and the rejection based on the 1995 Resolution was improper. The court set aside the order dated 27/6/2000 and directed the respondents to reconsider the application under the 1992 Resolution within four months.
Headnote
A) Pension Law - Freedom Fighter's Pension - Applicability of Government Resolutions - The application made in 1985 ought to be considered under the Government Resolution dated 5/9/1992, not the Government Resolution dated 4/7/1995, as the latter was not in force at the time of application. Held that the rejection based on the 1995 Resolution was improper and the matter must be reconsidered under the 1992 Resolution (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the application for freedom fighter's pension made in 1985 should be considered under the Government Resolution dated 5/9/1992 or the Government Resolution dated 4/7/1995.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order dated 27/6/2000, and directed the respondents to reconsider the application of the deceased husband of the petitioner in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 5/9/1992 within four months from the date of the order.
Law Points
- Government Resolution dated 5/9/1992
- Government Resolution dated 4/7/1995
- Pension Scheme for Freedom Fighters
- Applicability of Government Resolutions
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (01) 331
Writ Petition No. 1603 of 2008
A.P. Deshpande, N.D. Deshpande
Mr. S.S. Chillarge (holding for Mr. V.G. Sakolkar) for petitioner, Mrs. V.A. Shinde (AGP) for respondent No.1, Mr. Bhushan Kulkarni for respondent Nos. 2 and 3
Basantabai W/o Maniklal Jaiswal
The State of Maharashtra, The Chairman, Freedom Fighters' High Power Committee, The District Felicitation Committee for Freedom Fighters
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking direction to consider and decide application for freedom fighter's pension.
Remedy Sought
Direction to respondents to consider and decide the application filed by the deceased husband of the petitioner in 1985 for grant of freedom fighter's pension.
Filing Reason
The application for pension made in 1985 was rejected based on a Government Resolution of 1995, whereas it should have been considered under the 1992 Resolution.
Previous Decisions
The first application (1985) was rejected on 26-5-1995/24-7-1995 as time-barred. The second application (11/8/1995) was rejected on 27/6/2000 for non-compliance with Government Resolution dated 4/7/1995. Writ Petition No. 939/1998 was disposed of on 18/11/1998 directing consideration within four months.
Issues
Whether the application for freedom fighter's pension made in 1985 should be considered under the Government Resolution dated 5/9/1992 or the Government Resolution dated 4/7/1995.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the first application was of 1985 and ought to be decided under the Government Resolution dated 5/9/1992, not the Government Resolution dated 4/7/1995.
Ratio Decidendi
An application for pension must be considered under the Government Resolution in force at the time of the application, not under a later resolution. The rejection based on a later resolution is improper.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as the first application moved by the deceased husband of the petitioner was of the year 1985, the same ought to have been decided at the touch-stone of the requirements laid down under the Government Resolution dated 5/9/1992 and not under the Government Resolution dated 4th July, 1995.
Procedural History
The deceased husband applied for pension in 1985, rejected in 1995 as time-barred. He reapplied in 1995, filed WP 939/1998 which was disposed of in 1998 directing consideration within four months. The application was rejected in 2000 under the 1995 Resolution. The petitioner filed the present writ in 2008 after receiving a notice from the Collector in 2006.
