explaining that applications were submitted by the petitioner without producing documentary evidence in support of the claim and the certificates produced thereafter were not in tune with the Rules and finally the claim of the petitioner that her husband's service terminated on account of freedom struggle was also found incorrect, since from the records, it was found that he happened to be discharged from service on account of reduction of strength of the regiment and not due to his involvement in freedom struggle. It was also stated that from the certificate issued by the Senior Record Officer, Madras Regiment, it was seen that his character was assessed as exemplary and his enrollment in Madras Regiment was on 24.3.1943 and that the date of discharge was on 7.6.1947, when his age was 24 years. Since the documents produced by the petitioner and the claim raised did not tally, her application was rejected. The respondents had further found that there was absolutely no material to support her claim that her husband participated in the freedom struggle during 1942-43.
