Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Purushottam Vyankatrao Dehedkar, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents to grant him freedom fighter's pension with effect from 1.1.1995. He claimed to have participated in the freedom struggle and produced documents including a certificate from a former M.L.A. and a letter from the District Magistrate. The High Power Committee of Freedom Fighter rejected his claim on 4.7.1995 and 10.11.2006, stating that the documents were not sufficient to prove his involvement. During the pendency of the petition, the original petitioner died, and his legal representatives were brought on record. The court examined the documents and found that they did not establish actual participation in the freedom movement. The court noted that the certificate from the former M.L.A. was not supported by any contemporaneous record, and the letter from the District Magistrate merely forwarded the application without verification. The court held that the burden of proof lies on the claimant, and the petitioner failed to discharge it. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, upholding the orders of the High Power Committee.
Headnote
A) Freedom Fighter Pension - Burden of Proof - Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 - The petitioner claimed freedom fighter's pension but failed to produce satisfactory evidence of his participation in the freedom struggle. The court held that the documents submitted, including a certificate from a former M.L.A. and a letter from the District Magistrate, were insufficient to prove his claim. The High Power Committee's decision to reject the claim was upheld. (Paras 1-10)
B) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The court exercised its writ jurisdiction to review the decision of the High Power Committee. It found no error in the committee's conclusion that the petitioner had not substantiated his claim for freedom fighter's pension. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to freedom fighter's pension under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980, based on the documents produced.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The impugned orders dated 10.11.2006 and 4.7.1995 are upheld.
Law Points
- Freedom fighter pension
- burden of proof
- documentary evidence
- Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme
- 1980
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (12) 4
WRIT PETITION NO. 4497 OF 2007
NARESH H. PATIL, SHRIHARI P.DAVARE
Shri S.P.Deshmukh for petitioners, Shri V.D.Godbharle for respondent nos. 1 and 3, Shri Bhushan B. Kulkarni for respondent no.2
Purushottam Vyankatrao Dehedkar (deceased) through L.Rs. Smt. Sushilabai Purushottam Dehedkar, Vinayak s/o Purushottam Dehedkar, Arun s/o Purushottam Dehedkar, Nandkishor s/o Purushottam Dehedkar, Ravikumar s/o Purushottam Dehedkar, Chandrakant s/o Purushottam Dehedkar
The State of Maharashtra, High Power Committee of Freedom Fighter, The Collector, Jalna
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking freedom fighter's pension.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of orders dated 10.11.2006 and 4.7.1995 and direction to grant freedom fighter's pension with effect from 1.1.1995.
Filing Reason
Rejection of claim for freedom fighter's pension by the High Power Committee.
Previous Decisions
High Power Committee rejected the claim on 4.7.1995 and 10.11.2006.
Issues
Whether the petitioner is entitled to freedom fighter's pension under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that he participated in the freedom struggle and produced documents including a certificate from a former M.L.A. and a letter from the District Magistrate.
Respondents contended that the documents were insufficient to prove actual participation in the freedom movement.
Ratio Decidendi
The burden of proof lies on the claimant to establish actual participation in the freedom struggle. Mere production of certificates without contemporaneous evidence is insufficient to claim freedom fighter's pension under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner, namely, Purushottam Vyankatrao Dehedkar, who was of 87 years, filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India...
During the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner expired and his heirs and legal representatives as petitioner nos. 1(A) to 1(F) have been brought on record...
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a claim for freedom fighter's pension which was rejected by the High Power Committee on 4.7.1995 and 10.11.2006. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition in 2007. During the pendency, the original petitioner died and his legal representatives were substituted. The petition was heard and decided on 08.12.2010.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
