Judgment :- The petitioner herein challenges an order of the second respondent passed 7.2.1990 cancelling the Freedom Fighters ’ Pension awarded to the petitioner in the 1980. 2. The petitioner is a native of Poolathur village, Kodaikanal Taluk and he was imprisoned from 8.5.1941 to 23.6.1941. He has participated in the freedom movement. When Government of Tamil Nadu relaxed the rules regarding the eligibility for the grant of from 3 months imprisonment to three weeks imprisonment for getting freedom pension, the petitioner thought it fit to apply for the same enclosing therewith a co certificate issued by one P.S.Celusamy, Ex.M.L.A. and he got the pension also. When petitioner herein applied for certificate to the Superintendent of Madurai central prison, was informed that the records were eaten by white ants and it is not possible to certificate as the records are also not in order. When such is the case, the petitioner been given a show cause notice on 23.6.1989 for the cancellation of the pension granted the year 1980. The petitioner gave reply to the show cause notice on 13.7.1989 another occasion which is not dated and they were produced before me. However, second respondent considered the representation of the petitioner dated 13.7.1991 cancelled the grant of pension on the ground that the petitioner ’ s name is not found convict register kept in the Central Jail, Madurai for the period from 8.5.1941 to 23.6.1941 and that the petitioner has given a false information. It is also stated in the impugned that since the petitioner has not proved the fact that he was imprisoned for the period from 8.5.1941 23.6.1941 the pension granted to him in the year 1980 has been cancelled. 3. In this case, the respondent State has not filed a counter affidavit, though it is fixed case. 4. In view of my order passed in W.P.No.3591 of 1990 (S.P.V.Ramasamy v. Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu Public (PP III) Madras-9 and two others), dated 10.7.1991 arose in a similar situation like this, this petition will also stand allowed. Apart from that, petitioner in this case has a stronger case that the case arose in W.P.No.3591 of mentioned supra. 4. In view of my order passed in W.P.No.3591 of 1990 (S.P.V.Ramasamy v. Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu Public (PP III) Madras-9 and two others), dated 10.7.1991 arose in a similar situation like this, this petition will also stand allowed. Apart from that, petitioner in this case has a stronger case that the case arose in W.P.No.3591 of mentioned supra. In this case, when the petitioner submitted applications in the years and in 1980 he was informed by the Superintendent, Central Jail Madurai that no were available in the Central Jail, Madurai as they were eaten by white ants and they not able to give any records. But, on the other hand, the impugned order before me that some officer inspected the Central Jail, Madurai and found that the petitioner not found in the records. The stand of the respondent is wholly inconsistent. When petitioner made sincere and serious efforts in the year 1977 and 1980, he was informed the records were not available and as such he has a right to produce a co certificate in the year 1980 to prove his case. I do not see any sanctity in stating that name should be found in the convict register to prove his case. The rules themselves say it is enough to produce a co-prisoner’s certificate obtained either from Ex.M.L.A. or Ex.M.P. In such circumstances, I fail to see how the petitioner’s freedom fighters can be cancelled by the second respondent on the ground that he has not produced records to prove that he was imprisoned for freedom movement stating -when an inspected the Madurai Jail, he found that the petitioner’s name has not been found convict register. It is also seen that when the petitioner applied in the years 1977 and he was informed that no records were available as white ants had eaten away the records view of that, the impugned order is quashed, the writ petition will stand allowed and respondents are directed to pay the petitioner the freedom fighters’ pension and also entire arrears. However, there will be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.