Dismissed

Nanu Gopi (Ex.Ina) v. Union of India

Kerala HC5 Dec 2022WP(C)/39053/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, an alleged 100-year-old freedom fighter, challenged Under Secretary's rejection of his Swathantratha Sainik Saman pension application due to missing prison duration evidence. Court upheld rejection but granted liberty to submit fresh documents.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to submit fresh details/documents in case of compliance of the terms and conditions of the scheme.

Nanu Gopi (Ex.Ina) Vs Union of India — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶4

MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 14TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 39053 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

NANU GOPI (EX.INA)
AGED 100 YEARS
S/O. NANOO, VILAYILPUTHEN VEEDU, THANNIMOODU,
CHERUNNIYOOR P.O., VARKALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695142

¶8

BY ADV P.ANOOP (MULAVANA)

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT MINISTRY OF
DEFENCE, DEPARTMENT OF EX-SERVICEMEN WELFARE,
FFR DIVISION, 2ND FLOOR, JAISINGH ROAD,
NEW DELHI-110 001 – 110001

¶11

2 PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (FFP-A) DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶12

3 JOINT SECRETARY FFP DIVISION MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, 2ND FLOOR, NDCE-II BUILDING ZAI-SING ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 001, PIN – 110001

¶13

SRI.S.MANU DSGI

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

WP(C) NO. 39053 OF 2022

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Challenge in this writ petition is to the order Ext.P14 dated 22.11.2022 whereby the Under Secretary to the Government of India rejected the case of the petitioner, though the matter was taken up in view of the interim directions dated 25.08.2022 passed by this Court in the earlier writ petition bearing No.27379/2022.

¶19

The case set up by the petitioner is that being freedom fighter had been issued a repatriation certificate by Captain Lakshmi, Head of Rani Jancy Regiment in the presence of Captain S.S.Yadava and Captain Signal on 23.07.1945 at rear head quarters, though by now the said office was not in existence. The co-mates of the petitioner are not alive and therefore not in a position to furnish the co-prisoners certificate except the one which is in his position and the contents of which were certified by the Member of Parliament. The Principal Secretary to the State Government had also

¶20

WP(C) NO. 39053 OF 2022

¶21

¶22

recommended the case for appropriate action but the same was rejected by the under Secretary in a callous manner. This Court had issued directions to the Secretary to Government to take a call. It is in that background the impugned order has been passed and the writ petition bearing No.27379/2022 was closed with liberty to challenge the order impugned herein.

¶23

The Government had come out with a scheme called SSS Pension under SSS Yojana (Swathantratha Sainik Saman) for a freedom fighter to claim pension if the conditions enumerated therein are complied with. In view of the direction of this Court dated 06.01.2022, the matter was examined by the Ministry and after detailed deliberation, it was found that the petitioner was not eligible for grant of the pension due to the lack of primary or secondary evidence. The report and recommendation from the concerned State Government though was mandatory but could not have been said to be final and binding for the reason that the certificate of Captain Francis Decruze issued in favour of the petitioner did not

¶24

WP(C) NO. 39053 OF 2022

¶25

¶26

contain the nature and period of suffering certifying the petitioner to be eligible for the pension as the scheme envisages certain conditions which are enumerated hereinbelow:

¶27

(i) For the purpose of grant of SSS Pension under the SSS Yojana, a freedom fighter is:-

¶28

(a) A person who had suffered minimum imprisonment of six months in the mainland jails before Independence. Ex-INA personnel are also eligible for pension if the imprisonment/detention suffered by them was outside India for six months or more. In case of women and SC/ST freedom fighters, the minimum period of actual Imprisonment for eligibility is three months.

¶29

(b) A person who on account of his participation in freedom struggle remained underground for six months or more provided he was:-

¶30

(i) a proclaimed offender; or

¶31

(ii) one on whom an award for arrest/head was announced; or

¶32

(iii) one whose detention order was issued but not served.

¶33

(iv) voluntary underground suffering or selfexile for party work under the command of the party leaders is not covered as eligible sufferings for pension under the Scheme.

¶34

WP(C) NO. 39053 OF 2022

¶35

¶36

(c) A person who on account of participation in the freedom struggle was interned in his home or externed from his district under the orders of the competent authority for six months or more.

¶37

(d) A person whose property was confiscated or attached or sold due to participation in the National Freedom Struggle under the orders of the competent authority.

¶38

(e) A person who was permanently incapacitated during firing or lathi charge.

¶39

(f) A person who lost his Government job (Central or State Government, including job in local bodies) and thus was deprived from the means of livelihood for participation in the National Freedom Struggle.

¶40

(g) A person who was awarded the punishment of 10 strokes of caning/flogging/whipping.

¶41

(ii) The applicant should furnish the documents indicated below, whichever is applicable, in order to prove his claimed sufferings for grant of pension under the Yojana:-

¶42

(a) In case of imprisonment a certificate from the concerned jail authority, District Magistrate or the State Government indicating the period of sentence awarded, date of admission, date of release, facts of the case and reasons for release.

¶43

WP(C) NO. 39053 OF 2022

¶44

¶45

(b) In case the records of the relevant period are not available with the State Govt., a Non-Availability of Records Certificate (NARC) in prescribed format from the concerned State Government is required along with two Co-Prisoner Certificates (CPC) from freedom fighters who had a proven jail suffering of minimum 1 year and who were with the applicant in the jail for a minimum period of six months. In case the certifier happens to be sitting M.P. or MLA or Ex. M.P./M.L.A, only one Co-Prisoners' Certificate in place of two is required.”

¶46

4. Even the affidavit of the Lekshmanan Sivadasan

¶47

placed on record also did not contain the exact period of imprisonment whereas the minimum one year imprisonment is

¶48

required for a co-prisoner. All the documents have been rejected.

¶49

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that Swathantratha Sainik Saman Pension Scheme is document based and the petitioner had only aforementioned documents. I am of the view that for the time being no case is made out whereby petitioner can be said to be

¶50

WP(C) NO. 39053 OF 2022

¶51

¶52

eligible under the aforementioned pension scheme. However,

¶53

liberty is granted to submit fresh details/documents in case there is compliance of the terms and conditions of the scheme.

¶54

In this view matter, the order Ext.P14, at this stage, is upheld.

¶55

Writ petition disposed of with the aforementioned

observation.

Sd/-

AMIT RAWAL

JUDGE

nak

WP(C) NO. 39053 OF 2022

¶62

¶63

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39053/2022

¶64

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶65

`Exhibit p1`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY` `CAPTAIN LEKSHMY DATED 03-07-1945( ALONG` `WITH TYPED COPY)`
`Exhibit p2`	`CERTIFICATE WAS ISSUED TO HIM BY VAKKOM` `KHADER ASSOCIATION & RESEARCH LIBRARY` `DATED 20-11-2017`
`Exhibit p3`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 11-03-` `2016( ALONG WITH TYPED COPY)`
`Exhibit p4`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 23-` `01-1945 ( ALONG WITH TYPED COPY)`
`Exhibit p5`	`TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(MS) 207/2017 DATED` `03-07-2017 ( ALONG WITH ENGLISH` `TRANSLATION)`
`Exhibit p6`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY THE` `2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT` `DATED 30-01-2019`
`Exhibit p7`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED` `21-01-2020( ALONG WITH TYPED COPY)`
`Exhibit p8`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY THE` `2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT` `DATED 18-02-2020`
`Exhibit p9`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 08-09-` `2020 ( ALONG WITH TYPED COPY)`
`Exhibit p10`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.` `8282 OF 2021`
`Exhibit p11`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CONTEMPT` `CASE NO 1214/2022`

¶66

WP(C) NO. 39053 OF 2022

¶67

9

¶68

Exhibit p12A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE 3RD
RESPONDENT IN FILE NO F NO 52/CC/06/2021-
FF/INA DATED 05-07-2022

¶69

Exhibit p13A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN WPC.27379
/2022. DATED .25 /08 /2022.

¶70

Exhibit p14TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3 RD
RESPONDENT IN FNO 52 /CC/06/2021 -FF/INA.
DATED;22/11/2022.

Nanu Gopi (Ex.Ina) v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nanu Gopi (Ex.Ina) v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhilash.K.C., Vs the Deputy Excise Commissioner

Atlas Celestial Park Apartment Owners Association, Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Kerala Transport Company Vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation

Sijin Vs State of Kerala

S.a.Joyraja Vs the Appellate Authority and Deputy Labour Commissioner

Tropical Health Foundation of India Vs the District Collector