Tamil Nadu - Madurai   

Court dismisses writ petition moved by an octogenarian

Staff Reporter

The petitioner seeks `Swatantrate Sainik Samman' pension The court said the evidence on record did not indicate his underground sufferings

MADURAI : The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has dismissed a writ petition moved by an octogenarian from Madurai seeking `Swatantrate Sainik Samman' pension meant for freedom fighters.

Though the petitioner claimed that he had participated in the Quit India Movement and went underground between October 28, 1942 and June 15, 1943 following an arrest warrant issued against him, the Bench said the evidence on record did not indicate his underground sufferings or that any warrant was issued against him as a proclaimed offender.

Hence, the court concluded that the decision of the Union Government declining the benefit of the scheme to the petitioner did not suffer from "unreasonableness or unfairness." On the petitioner's contention that the Madurai Chief Judicial Magistrate had rejected his application, for want of records, with an endorsement, "The records relating to the period between 1942-43 were not available with the court," the Bench said, the petitioner had not specifically indicated any case number in which he was wanted or in which he was proclaimed as an offender.

"In a court of law, no such records are maintained for underground sufferings. Hence, the magistrate has rightly rejected the copy application," the Bench added. Referring to the `Personal Knowledge Certificates' provided by two other freedom fighters in support of the petitioner, the Bench said, according to the certificates, the petitioner went underground only on the advice of his then party leaders. Whereas, persons who exercised voluntary self-exile were not covered under the pension scheme.

The Union Government in 1985 had once rejected the petitioner's claim for want of sufficient proof and the latter preferred another application in 1991. Forwarding the second application to the State Government, the then Madurai District Collector in 1997 recommended in favour of the petitioner. But the State Government forwarded the application to the Union Government, without any recommendation, which rejected the claim through its order dated November 14, 2002.

The Bench pointed out that the State Government recommendations, which were mandatory for granting pension under the scheme, were also lacking in the present case.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Madurai High Court Bench goes to the rescue of tsunami-hit fishermen
Court dismisses writ petition moved by an octogenarian
Minorities to decide on their election strategy
Former MLA floats new party
Many schools need ramps
`Intelligent' analysis of staff
Tension in school
Felicitation to `Kalaimamani' recipient
A `newspaper coverage' indeed!
Around the City
In Madurai Today

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu