Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 315 (DEL)

Mridula Devi v. Union of India

2015-01-30

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, PRATIBHA RANI

body2015
JUDGMENT : 1. Having heard learned Counsel for the appellant as also the respondents who appeal on advance copy of the appeal being served we are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge ought not to have dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant in view of Annexure P-2 to the writ petition. The writ petition should have been disposed of issuing a direction to the State of Bihar to certify the correctness or otherwise of Annexure P-2 which is, as claimed by the appellant, a certified copy issued by the District Record Keeper. The document in question purports” to record that late husband of the petitioner along with 25 other persons were declared proclaimed offenders and that the same was generated from the primary register GR 572/42. 2. The reason being, as noted by the learned Single Judge, that if a claim for freedom fighter pension, as per the policy of the Government of India could not be made good with reference to primary documents, the same could be proved with reference to the record maintained as per GR 572/42; provided it was verified as correct by the State Government. 3. Unfortunately for the appellant who is the wife of late Sh. Raman and Singh, neither she nor her late husband, who had applied for a freedom fighter pension were told that the document in question required to be submitted to the State Government for its authentication to be verified. 4. The late husband of the appellant remained under the belief that a Personal Knowledge Certificate issued by a Member of Parliament was good and for said reason he obtained one from Mr. Sheetal Prasad Singh and another from Sh. Yamuna Singh. 5. We dispose of the appeal issuing a direction to the Union of India to make a reference to the State of Bihar with respect to Annexure P-2 filed along with the writ petition; certified copy thereof being with the appellant. The reference would be made to the State of Bihar. The query would be are the contents thereof authentic. Based thereon necessary decision would he taken afresh by the Central Government. 6. If the Central Government wants the original of Annexure P-2 to be submitted to it, a communication shall be sent to the appellant to do needful. 7. The reference would be made to the State of Bihar. The query would be are the contents thereof authentic. Based thereon necessary decision would he taken afresh by the Central Government. 6. If the Central Government wants the original of Annexure P-2 to be submitted to it, a communication shall be sent to the appellant to do needful. 7. The Central Government shall make a reference to the State of Bihar within six weeks from today and while making the reference Annexure P-2 filed with the writ petition would be sent to the State of Bihar for verification and authentication. 8. The State of Bihar shall do the necessary verification and submit a response to the Central Government within two months of receipt of communication from the Central Government. Within two months thereafter the Central Government would take the necessary decision. 9. If the late husband of the petitioner is found entitled to the freedom fighter pension, same shall be disbursed to the appellant from the date her husband made the application. Her entitlement to receive the benefit as the widow of late Sh. Ramanand Singh would be considered in said eventuality and amount payable shall also be paid to the appellant. 10. No costs.