SAVITRI DEVI v. THE STATE OF BIHAR & Ors

Judgment

1. 2.

3. 4. 5. THE STATE OF BIHAR, PATNA. THE DISTRICT OFFICER CUM DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BHOJPUR, ARAH. THE DY. COLLECTOR (GENERAL BRANCH), BHOJPUR, ARAH. THE ACCOUNTANTS GENERAL (A&E), BIHAR. UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.(CENTRAL) HUMAN RESOURCES, INDIA. ………………………………. RESPONDENTS ----------- 4

22.1.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the Government of India as also State of Bihar. The prayer of the petitioner this writ application as set out in paragraph no. 1 reads as follows : - “That the petitioner seeks leave to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction directing to respondents act in accordance with law and to make payment of Freedom Fighter Family Pension along with arrears and suitable interest thereon to the petitioner being the legitimate wife of Late Shashi Bhushan Lal who ever a Freedom Fighter pensioner. “ 2 Counsel for the petitioner has strongly relied on an order of the Collector of the Bhojpur district dated

6.6.1996 (Annexure-6) to contend that since the aforesaid order was passed by the office of the Collector, Bhojpur for allowing the petitioner to draw special allowance for the period 1.9.1994 to 5.9.1995 at the rate of 250/- per month and medical allowance for the period September, 1994 to September, 1995 at the rate of Rs.

20/- per month of the lifetime of Mr. Lal under Freedom Fighter Pension Scheme, the Government of India now must treat the petitioner as a legally wedded wife of Late S.B. Lal and allow the claim of the petitioner for payment of entire arrear of the freedom fighter pension with effect from 5.9.1995 onwards, the date on which Mr. Lal died as per his death certificate (Annexure-3) This Court finds it difficult to accept the aforesaid submission. It is a peculiar case where the petitioner claiming to be born on 23.4.1938 vide Annexure-7, as per her own declaration is said to have been married in the year 1989, at an age of 51 years to her husband late S.B.Lal aged then about 66 years. It is also an admitted fact that Late Mr. Lal was born on 8.11.1923 (see Annexure-2) and was an employee of Eastern Railway, Danapur Division and had retired on 31.7.1980 as is apparent from his pension payment order (Annexure-1). 3 It is the case of the petitioner that the first wife namely Shanti Devi was alive till the date of retirement of the husband of the petitioner and in fact, had died in the lifetime of her husband, Mr. Lal on 22.6.1985 (see Annexure-5). It is also undisputed that when the Government of India had sanctioned the Freedom Fighter Pension in favour of Mr. S.B. Lal he had declared the name of his wife as Shanti Devi as is clearly borne out of the order of Government of India (Annexure-4) In that view of the matter, at least there was nothing in the official records of the Railway or the Government of India also to show that the petitioner was the wife of Late S.B. Lal as her marriage had taken place almost nine years after the retirement of Mr. Lal and five years of his being sanctioned the pension under Freedom Fighter Scheme. It is thus really very difficult for this Court to also accept all this story which has been introduced by the petitioner in the writ petition. There is no authentic document for the Government of India to accept and act upon the theory of the second marriage of the petitioner with Mr. Lal at the age of 66 years so that she can be given the Freedom Fighter Pension earlier sanctioned in favour of Late S.B. Lal. It is further difficult for the Government of India to accept that when the name of the petitioner was not entered into in the records of the 4 Railways for the purposes of payment of family pension, yet the Government of India should have treated the petitioner as the widow of Mr. Lal. It is thus really shocking and yet at the same time surprising for their court to observe that as to on what basis, the Collector of Bhojpur district had allowed payment of certain special allowance or medical allowance payable to a Freedom Fighter from the funds of Government of India in favour of the petitioner by his order dated 6.6.1996 without there being any succession certificate issued by the competent civil court of her being the widow of Late S.B. Lal. The casual manner in which the Block Development Officer, Barhara had also issued the proof of identity of the petitioner on

14.6.1996 (Annexure-7) declaring the petitioner to be the wife of Late S.B. Lal or the certificate dated

30.5.1997 (Annexure-8) as also the certificate dated

4.5.1999 issued Anchaladhikari, Barhara Bhojpur to the same effect would only reflect that there has been a well hatched conspiracy to defraud the exchequre and/or funds of the Government of India under Freedom Fighter Scheme. It has to be noted that Mr. Lal was not an issueless person rather the certificate of Anchaladhikari Barhara (Annexure-9) would go to show that he had three sons and a daughter from his first wife and as 5 such the amount of pension or other benefits under Freedom Fighter Pension Scheme of the Government of India was not payable to the petitioner the alleged second wife. In such a situation, this Court would not be in a position to allow the prayer of the petitioner by issuing a direction to the respondent, Government of India to release payment of freedom fighter pension originally sanctioned to Late Mr. S. B. Lal till the petitioner obtains a succession certificate from the competent civil court. Consequently this writ application subject to the observation made above, is hereby dismissed. At the same time, this Court having noticed the aforesaid illegal set of orders dated 22.5.1996 in File No. XXI-63/96 as mentioned in the officer order dated

6.6.1996 issued by the office of the Collector of Bhojpur district (Annexure-6) and the two certificate issued by the B.D.O., Barhara (Annexure-7 and 8) as also the Family certificate dated 4.5.1999 (Annexure-9) would direct the Commissioner of Patna Division to hold an enquiry and fix the responsibility for issuing such fictitious order and/or certificates as contained in Anenxure-6, 7, 8 and 9 within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this 6 order. The report submitted by the Commissioner would be thereafter examined and acted upon by the State Government for passing appropriate punishment against the erring officials in accordance with law. Let a copy of this order be sent along with a copy of the writ application be sent to the Commissioner of Patna Division for its compliance. Let a copy of this order be also given to Assistant Solicitor General and SC-11 for its being transmitted to all concerned for its compliance in letter and spirit. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)