P. M. CHAUHAN, J. ( 1 ) THE learned single Judge rejected the Writ Petition of the appellant who had challenged the order by the Government refusing the pension and other benefits to the appellant as a Freedom Fighter observing that the appellant has failed to produce the evidence that he had undergone imprisonment for the freedom of the Nation. The learned single Judge also observed that the appellant was asked by the Government to produce satisfactory evidence and then his case would be considered In view of the learned single Judge the decision of the Committee formed for considering such cases of the Freedom Fighters cannot be said to be in any way arbitrary or unreasonable and the Committee was justified in insisting upon the evidence as stated in the letter. ( 2 ) THE appellant applied to the Government for giving him the pension and other benefits as a Freedom Fighter. According to him he had undergone imprisonment for the cause of the Nation for four months from August 1942 and he was imprisoned in Surendranagar Jail. Alongwith the application the appellant had produced some certificates which were considered by the Committee and the Committee was not satisfied and accordingly the appellant was informed by letter dated 4/06/1987 that the appellant cannot be granted the pension from the State Discretionary Fund as the certificate from the Jail in support of the fact that he was imprisoned for the period of four months was not produced as according to the appellant Jail record was not available. No certificate was also produced from the Member of the Parliament or the Member of Legislative Assembly who might be in Jail alongwith the appellant if at all the appellant had suffered imprisonment. The Certificates issued by Shri Mahendrasinh Chauhan M. L. A. Baroda Rural dated 16/03/1987 and Kasam Bapu M. L. A. Gandhinagar are not from the persons who had undergone the imprisonment alongwith the appellant and were co-prisoners of the appellant and therefore the said certificates are not helpful to the appellant as the scheme requires the certificate by such Members of the Legislative Assembly or the Members of Parliament. The Government also informed him that if at all the certificate of the co-prisoners members of Parliament or Members of the Legislative Assembly is produced the Government would consider his case for pension. The Government also informed him that if at all the certificate of the co-prisoners members of Parliament or Members of the Legislative Assembly is produced the Government would consider his case for pension. It transpires that the appellant again asserted his claim and for reconsidering the decision of the Government. The appellant was informed by letter dated 3/12/1987 reiterating the same decision and the appellant was informed to produce the certificate for considering his case on merits. The appellant d not produce the letters but in appeal copies of the letters are produced by Mr. I. H Jani Deputy Secretary to the Government of Gujarat General Administration Department (Freedom Fighters Cell ). It is therefore clear that the claim of the petitioner as a Freedom Fighter. is not finally rejected by the Government and the appellant is directed to produce the evidence which should satisfy his claim. At this stage the Committee. consisting of the Chief Minister the Minister for Agriculture and the Minister for Revenue was not satisfied that the appellant is eligible for the pension as freedom fighter. ( 3 ) THE scheme for the pension to the Freedom Fighters is prepared by the Government and Rules are framed for that purpose by Government Resolution No. SNS-1082/3100-GH dated 8/07/1983 The Committee consisting of the Chief Minister Minister for Agriculture and Minister for Revenue has to administer the discretionary fund for the pension etc. to the persons who have served the Nation in various fields and to that dependents. It is specifically provided in clause (4) that the grant or pension shall be given as per the discretion of the Committee. The necessary provision is required to be made in the Budget for pension to the Freedom Fighters said the discretionary grant is required to be placed at the disposal of the Committee for that purpose. The pension or the grant to the extent as specified in the Government Resolution can be granted to the persons who have served the Nation in various fields viz. political social etc. as specified in the Government Resolution and who are in need of help The persons intending to get the benefits are required to submit the application in the prescribed form through the Collector of the District. political social etc. as specified in the Government Resolution and who are in need of help The persons intending to get the benefits are required to submit the application in the prescribed form through the Collector of the District. The Government has also decided to grant pension to the persons who have served the Nation in the freedom struggle and they are also required to submit the application in the prescribed form. The Collectors are given instructions that while forwarding the recommendations for the pension the certificate of the Jail authorities indicating the period of imprisonment undergone by such freedom fighter should be attached and in case such certificate is not available the certificate of the Ex or the present Member of Parliament or the Member of the Legislative Assembly who might have been in Jail alongwith such Freedom Fighter should be attached and it should also be stated that if such evidence is not available the applicant is not entitled to the pension. It is also provided in clause (10) that the identification marks as mentioned in the certificates issued by the Jail authorities produced by the Freedom Fighters or their dependents regarding imprisonment for freedom struggle are required to be verified. Clause (g) specifically provides that the Committee has to examine the merits and take the decision. The form of the certificate to be issued by the Member of Parliament or Member of the Legislative Assembly is prescribed and it provides that the Freedom Fighter should be co-prisoner alongwith such person. From the Scheme therefore it is clear that the discretionary grant is to be utilised in a particular manner and the person claiming to be a Freedom Fighter is required to satisfy the Committee consisting of three Ministers that he had undergone imprisonment or participated in such freedom movement and the Committee has to take decision on merits on examining the evidence produced before it. The appellant has failed to satisfy the Committee by producing relevant evidence and the Committee has taken decision on merits. The decision of the Committee therefore cannot be said to be arbitrary or discriminatory and the learned single Judge has rightly rejected the Writ Petition. The appellant has failed to satisfy the Committee by producing relevant evidence and the Committee has taken decision on merits. The decision of the Committee therefore cannot be said to be arbitrary or discriminatory and the learned single Judge has rightly rejected the Writ Petition. ( 4 ) IT is true that some certificates were produced by the appellant before the Committee which were not accepted as satisfactory evidence but that was within the competence of the Committee and this Court cannot weigh the evidence produced before the Committee as an appellate authority and decide on facts the claim of the appellant. Apart from that it is evident from the copies of the certificates produced by the appellant in the petition that the appellant failed to establish on facts the claim for the pension and other benefits as Freedom Fighter. The certificate issued by Shri Yoga Nand President Freedom Fighters Organisation Gujarat does not reveal that the appellant had undergone the. imprisonment. It is stated that the appellant had worked with Pruthvisinh Azad at Bhavnagar and he got the information from Swami Rao. It is not stated that the appellant had undergone the imprisonment. Yoga Nand has no personal knowledge about the activities of the appellant. The certificate issued by Shri Babubhai Patel is to the effect that the appellant is a good astrologer and below the certificate a note has been added to the effect that the appellant had taken part in the movement during freedom struggle and was under ground worker and a fellow worker with Swami Rao (Pruthvisinh Azad ). Similarly the certificate issued by Shri Manilal G. Gandhi Ex-MLA of general character. It is only stated that the appellate had taken active part in the freedom movement at Bhavnagar. The certificates issued by M L. As. Shri Mahendrasinh Chauhan and Shri Kasam Bapu do not reveal that they had ever suffered imprisonment and the appellant was ever in Jail with them. Mahendrasinh Chauhan has only stated that he knew that the appellant had suffered imprisonment for six mouths in Surendranagar Jail in 1942. Similarly the facts stated by Kasam Bapu does not disclose that be was a co-prisoner with the appellant. Mahendrasinh Chauhan has only stated that he knew that the appellant had suffered imprisonment for six mouths in Surendranagar Jail in 1942. Similarly the facts stated by Kasam Bapu does not disclose that be was a co-prisoner with the appellant. The certificate issued by Somabhai Jorabhai Patel to the affect that he had gone to Surendranagar Jail in 1942 to see other prisoners and had seen the appellant iq Jail alongwith two other persons does not satisfy the requirement under the Scheme. The criteria is laid down for granting the pension and other benefits as Freedom Fighters and the person claiming such pension and other benefits has to satisfy the Committee by producing the convincing evidence. The fact of imprisonment can be established either by certificate from the concerned Jail or by Ex or present Member of Parliament or Member of Legislative Assembly who might be in Jail with such person. Requisite evidence is not produced by the appellant to satisfy the said Committee with regard to his claim and therefore his claim is rightly rejected. It is clear that the claim of the petitioner is not finally rejected and the Government has kept it open and called upon the appellate to produce the satisfactory evidence and in case such evidence is produced his case will be considered on merits. ( 5 ) FOR all these reasons we do not find any substance in this appeal. This Letters Patent Appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. Rule discharged. .