Dismissed

Godhan Singh v. State of Uttarakhand through Chief Secretary

Uttarakhand HC7 Jul 2022WPMS/3215/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Uttarakhand dismissed a writ petition seeking declaration of the deceased petitioner as a freedom fighter and sanction of his pension, as well as arrear benefits, noting the petitioners appeared to be interested in financial gains.

What did the court decide?

The writ application is dismissed in its entirety without any direction to the respondent.

Godhan Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Uttarakhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3215 of 2015

Godhan Singh

...…………. Petitioner

versus

State of Uttarakhand & others...…………. Respondents

¶7

Mr. Anil Anthwal, learned counsel for the writ applicant. Mr.Vinod Nautiyal, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.

¶8

Judgement dated: 07.07.2022

¶9

Hon’ble Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.

¶10

Upon hearing the learned counsels, the Court made the following Order.

¶11

Heard Mr. Anil Anthwal, learned counsel for the writ applicant and Mr. Vinod Nautiyal, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.

¶12

In this writ application, the petitioners prayed for the following reliefs:

¶13

“ (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to declare the petitioner as Freedom Fighter and sanction the Freedom Fighter Pension to the petitioner.

¶14

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the Freedom Fighter pension to the petitioner with arrear from the date when the other similarly situated Freedom Fighter declared

¶15

¶16

Freedom Fighter and sanctioned the Freedom Fighter Pension to them.

¶17

(iii) Issue any other or further writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶18

(iv) To award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner.”

¶19

During pendency of the writ application, the petitioner died and in his place, his nephews moved an application and they have been impleaded as petitioner no.1/1 and petitioner no1/2.

¶20

Admittedly, the petitioners, who claim their uncle to be a freedom fighter, are seeking financial benefits out of their uncle’s, efforts in the freedom fight. The petitioners appear to be greedy persons, interested in financial gains, and they cannot be granted the prayer of issuing discretionary writ of mandamus as sought by them.

¶21

Accordingly, the writ application is dismissed.

¶22

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶23

(S.K.Mishra, J.)

¶24

Kaushal

Godhan Singh v. State of Uttarakhand through Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Godhan Singh v. State of Uttarakhand through Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binod Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

State of Uttarakhand through Collector Vs Sri Jawahar Lal

Puran Chandra Tiwari Vs State of Uttarakhand through Principal Secretary

Sajid Vs State of Uttarakhand through Secretary (Home) Affairs Dehradun

Pramila Vs District Magistrate Haridwar

Apurva Acharya Vs Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority