Judgment :- Petitioner seeks writ of certiorarifed mandamus to quash the orders of the 2nd Respondent in No.52/CC/TN/128/2006 – FF/SZ dated 05.01.2007 and to direct the Respondents 1 & 2 to pay Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension and all other connected benefits. 2.Case of the Petitioner is that he took active part in the freedom struggle of India by forming Youth Association in the name and style of "Anti Imperialist Movement" along with other persons. Due to formation of Association, Petitioner and his associates were constrained to go underground to escape from arrest by British Police. Criminal proceedings were also initiated against the Petitioner and his associates. Government of Tamil Nadu released Book "WHOS WHO OF FREEDOM FIGHTERS" in the Silver Jubilee year of Independence, wherein the name of Petitioner is found place. But the Central Government failed to grant pension to the Petitioner. Petitioner has given representation on 010. 1972 and thereafter, various representation were given. 3. Since, Respondents 1 to 3 failed to consider his representation, Petitioner has filed W.P.No.5959/2004 directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to dispose the representation dated 012. 2003. By the order dated 30.3.2004, this Court directed the 3rd Respondent to dispose of the representation within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. 3rd Respondents in his letter dated 06. 2004 rejected the claim of the Petitioner for want of particulars in the prescribed format and informed to the Petitioner that his representation could be considered, if particulars are furnished in the prescribed format. Required particulars as called for by the 3rd Respondent were sent by representation dated 011. 2004. Inspite of that Respondents 1 to 3 have not considered the representation of the Petitioner. 4. Again Petitioner has filed W.P.No.47696/2006 directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to consider the representation dated 011. 2004. High Court was pleased to direct the 3rd Respondent to pass orders within a period of 8 weeks. 2nd Respondent in his order dated 01. 2007 rejected the representation of the petitioner. Hence, Petitioner preferred the present Writ Petition to quash the order of the 2nd Respondent in No.52/CC/TN/128/2006 dated 01. 2007 and directing the Respondents 1 and 2 to pay Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension under Central Government Scheme to the Petitioner. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the Respondents. 6. 2007 rejected the representation of the petitioner. Hence, Petitioner preferred the present Writ Petition to quash the order of the 2nd Respondent in No.52/CC/TN/128/2006 dated 01. 2007 and directing the Respondents 1 and 2 to pay Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension under Central Government Scheme to the Petitioner. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the Respondents. 6. For the purpose of grant of Samman Pension under the Scheme, a freedom fighter is:- .(a) A person who had suffered minimum imprisonment of six months in the mainland jails before Independence. Ex-INA personal 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 of pension is three months. (b) A person who on account of his participation in freedom struggle remained underground for six months or more provided he was: .(i) a proclaimed offender; or .(ii) one on whom an award for arrest/head was announced; or (iii) one whose detention order was issued but not served. Voluntary underground suffering of self-exile for party work under the command of the party leaders is not covered as eligible sufferings for pension under the Scheme. .(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. .(d) A person whose property was confiscated or attached and sold due to participation in the National Freedom Struggle under the orders of the competent authority. .(e) A person who permanently incapacitated during firing or lathi charge. .(f) A person who lost his Government job (Central or State Government, including job in local bodies) and thus deprived means of livelihood for participation in the National Freedom Struggle. .(g) A person who was awarded the punishment of 10 strokes of caning/flogging/Whipping. 7. The Petitioner claims Samman Pension in Category (b) underground suffering. To prove claim on account of underground sufferings under the scheme the following documents are to be produced as per pension scheme: "(b) For claims of underground suffering, documentary evidence by way of courts/Governments order proclaiming the applicant as an offender, announcing an award on his head or for his arrest or ordering his detention. To prove claim on account of underground sufferings under the scheme the following documents are to be produced as per pension scheme: "(b) For claims of underground suffering, documentary evidence by way of courts/Governments order proclaiming the applicant as an offender, announcing an award on his head or for his arrest or ordering his detention. In the absence of such certificate from official records, a Non-Availability of Records Certificate (NARC) from the concerned authorities alongwith a Personal Knowledge Certificate (PKC) from a prominent freedom fighter who had undergone imprisonment for a period of at least two years or more is required. 8. In the case of Petitioner based, on the report of the Tahsildar and the documents vide communication Na.Ka.46273/2004/U-1, dated 210. 2004, the District Collector Kanchipuram has considered the Petitioners case and has recommended for grant of Samman Pension in the said recommendation. The District Collector has observed that the Petitioner under went underground sufferings from 18.06.1943 to 17.03.1944. 9. The counter of 3rd Respondent only refers to the earlier order of the Central Government dated 05.01.2007. The counter affidavit filed by the State Government merely refers to the District Collector wherein the District Collector has recommended for considering the case of Petitioner for grant of Samman Pension. The State Government does not seem to have taken note of the report of the District Collector in view of the changed circumstances viz., in his communication dated 22.01.2004 it would be appropriate to direct the State Government to consider the representation of the Petitioner afresh. 10. As per the provisions of the scheme, grant of Samman Pension can be considered by the Central Government only when they are duly verified and recommended by the State Governments/Union Territory Administrations. The Petitioner appears to have sent the application directly to the Central Government without routing through the State Government. Considering the report of the District Collector the State Government has to make recommendation only then Petitioners case for grant of Samman Pension can be considered by the Central Government. 11. The impugned order refers to the letter of the State Advisory Committee dated 11.08.1977 and that the committee has not recommended the case of the Petitioner. The said letter of the State Government was much prior. In the light of the aforesaid letter of the District Collector Na.Ka.46273/2004/U-1, dated 210. 2004, the Petitioners case has to be reconsidered. 12. 11. The impugned order refers to the letter of the State Advisory Committee dated 11.08.1977 and that the committee has not recommended the case of the Petitioner. The said letter of the State Government was much prior. In the light of the aforesaid letter of the District Collector Na.Ka.46273/2004/U-1, dated 210. 2004, the Petitioners case has to be reconsidered. 12. The writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- "Petitioner shall submit the application before the State Government within a period of two weeks from the date of copy of this order. "The 3rd Respondent / State Government is directed to consider the recommendation of the District Collector Na.Ka.46273/2004/U-1, dated 210. 2004, and make such recommendation in accordance with the provisions of the scheme of pass appropriate order. "Since the Petitioner is aged 90 years, the State Government shall forward the application of the Petitioner along with its report within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of application. " Upon receipt of the application and the report of the State Government the Respondents 1 and 2 shall consider the matter afresh and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the application and the report of the State Government. 13. No order as to costs. Connected Miscellaneous petition is also closed.