JUDGMENT : N. KIRUBAKARAN, J. The Appeal has been preferred by the Government of India challenging the order of the learned single Judge in allowing the writ petition granting pension, known as, Freedom Fighter Pension from the year 1995. 2. The case of the respondent is that he participated in Quit India Movement in the year 1942 and he took out a protest march at Goripalayam, Madurai, and issued notices and pamphlets to the public condemning the British Rulers. Therefore, the British police tried to arrest the respondent/petitioner which compelled the respondent/petitioner to go underground for continuing the freedom struggle from 10.08.1942 to 10.08.1943. Thereafter, the freedom was obtained. The freedom fighters pension scheme was framed by the Central Government and he applied for that. As per the scheme he was supposed to enclose Certificate issued by Freedom Fighters. Accordingly, well known freedom fighters, namely I.Mayandibharathi and A.M. Lakshmanan, also confirmed the participation of the petitioner in the Free India Movement. However, the petitioner's claim for pension was rejected stating that the certificates issued by the freedom fighters are not according to the prescription given in the scheme. Further, it is stated that the documents are not the primary evidence duly issued by the Government. Challenging the same, the respondent/petitioner approached this Court. The learned single Judge after hearing both parties found that the rejection of the petitioner's claim by the appellant was technical. The said finding was given after perusing the documents filed by the respondent and also considering the age of the respondent, namely, 92 years. Moreover, the learned Judge also took into consideration the State Government representation to the appellant about granting of state pension to the respondent. In spite of recommendation made by the State Government as early as on 29.04.1997, the appellant has not properly considered the recommendation and other documents and therefore, quashed the order and directed the appellant to pay Swatantrata Sainik Pension to the petitioner from the year 1995. 3. This Court see no infirmity in the order passed by the learned Judge. Apart from that, a perusal of the Certificate issued by Mr. A.M. Lakshmanan, freedom fighter dated 20.10.1985 itself would reveal the details of Central Government Freedom Fighter Pension by an order No.29/767/77 F.F II and State Govt.P.P.O.No.1378/68 given to Mr. 3. This Court see no infirmity in the order passed by the learned Judge. Apart from that, a perusal of the Certificate issued by Mr. A.M. Lakshmanan, freedom fighter dated 20.10.1985 itself would reveal the details of Central Government Freedom Fighter Pension by an order No.29/767/77 F.F II and State Govt.P.P.O.No.1378/68 given to Mr. A.M. Lakshmanan, when the Certificate itself contains all these details, nothing prevented the appellant to verify the same and ascertain as to whether the said Freedom Rights is a really freedom fighter and the respondent is eligible to get the pension or not. Without doing that, merely based on the ground that the application is not in proper form, the appellant mechanically rejected the claim of the respondent/petitioner. As rightly pointed out, the respondent's age is 97 years. More over a well known Freedom Fighter namely I.Mayandibharathi, would not have given the certificate unless the respondent/petitioner took part in the freedom movement. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Government of India, is dismissed and the appellant is directed to pay the pension within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is also dismissed. Post this matter for reporting compliance after eight weeks.