High Court · 2025

Judgment

2. J. The Union of lndia, Rep bv_ its .secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Freedom righters Division, NDCC-il 'Buitding, S";6;J M;A: Niew Dethi_.1 10 001. -R'evenue The Government of Telangana., "Rep^ Department, Secretariat, HvderaOaa-SOO OO+. The chief Manager, Stat6. Bank of rndia, centrarised pension processing Centre, 15'Ftoor, SCAB Buildings, eant Siieer, Koii, ilyoeraOaO-S0O 195. _Uy tts iiiri,pif Secretarf

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the proc.No.1 121'log6tB4-FF (HC) dated 2g-og-2022 issued by the 'r't respondent whereby he rejected the request to give retrospective effect of date of application to the sanction of Swatantrata Sainik Samman family pension as illegal, irrational, unreasonabre, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice beside violation of the Articles 14 and 21 of lhe constitution of lndia and consequenfly set-aside the same by directing the respondents to refix the pension to the petitioner from the date of death of her husband i.e. from 1O-11-2018 f IA NO:1OF 2024 Petition under lsection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may :e pleased to order release the arrears from the date of death of the husband of the petitioner i.e., from 10.11.20111 also release the arrears with 8% interest per annum as per orders passed in F.1r1o.11211086184- FF(HC) of the 1"t respondent dt.2|.O9.2023 forth with, pending disposal of the main Writ petition IA NO :2OF 2024 Petition under Slection 151 CPC praying that in the crrcumstalces stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may k)e pleased to receive the additional documents (Ex.P.30 to Ex.P.33) in the present W.P.No.21452 of 20'.2i\ which are proper and necessary to adjudicakr the matter Couniel for the Petitioner: SRl. A. BHASKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI G. VENKATESHWARLU REP SRI K.L. N. RAGHAVENDRA REDDY, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT STANDING COUNSEL Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3:-- The Court made the following: ORDER I THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA WRIT PETITION NO.21452 OF 2023 Mr. A. Bhaskar Reddy, Ieamed counsel for the petitioner Mr. G. Venkateshwarlu, Iearned counsel representing Mr. K.L.N_ Raghavendra Reddy, learned Slanding Counsel for the respondent No.l. ORDER The petitioner is the widow of a freedom hghter and filed this writ petiLion for a Mandamus against the letter dated 29.O9.2022 issued by the respondent No-l-The Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Freedom Fighters Division, wherein request for payment of arrear pension with effect from March, 2019 was denied. The impugned letter states that the petitioner's pension shall be in accordance with the sanction order dated 18.03.2020.

2. The case of the petitioner, as argued by counsel, is that the pension of the petilioner's deceased husband should be transferred to the petitioner with effect from 11.11.201.8 i.e., one day after the death of the petitioner's husband on 1O.11.2018. Counsel submits -t that the delav in issuins the Sanction Order dated 18.O3.202O was caused entireiy by the respondent No.1 in view of the pension payment order of the petitioner's husband not mentioning the petitioner's name. Counsel accordingly argued that the petitioner's pension payment or the transfer of her husband's pension should 2 have been u,it-h eflect from 1 1.1 1.2O18 and not from 16.03.202O as sanctioned br the respondent No.1. 3- Learnecl counsel appearing for respondent No. 1/ansu'ering respondent places the Guidelines for disrbursement of Central Silrnman Pension which are to be followed bv authorised Public Sectc,r Banks- Counsel submits that the Guidt:lines were issued by the Minrstry of Home Affairs and relies on clalLse 5.2.2 of the Guidelines which provides for payment of dependent pension from thc dert: of application made by the spouse/d:Lughter as opposed to tl-rr: date of death of the pensioner.

4. The issue in the present writ petition is within the short compass as [c' $'hether the petitioner should be held to be entitled to earlier pension for the period 11.11.2018 - 16.O3.2020. The petitioner's c lzrim for payment of arrear pension is ba-*ed on the claim starting lrom 11.11.2018 i.e. a day after the derrth of her husband (tl-rr: lreedom fighter) on 1O. 11.2018. The death certificate is on record .

5. The sard claim cannot however be entertained in r,iew of the Guidelines which are admittedly being followed b5. the pulthc Sector Banks for disbursement of the freedom fighters pensi:n to the dependent lamily members. Clause 5.2.2 of the Guidelires clearly provides that the dependent pension shall be paid from t:re date of t 3 application of the spouse and not from the date of death o[ the pensloner.

6. In this case, the petitioner applied for dependent pension on

25.OI.2019 u,hich was sanctioned by the order dated 18'03'202O with effecl from 16.03.2020. Tlne Sanction Order further denied the , petitioner's claim for entitlement to any arrears under the Swatantra Sainik Samman (SSS) Yojana lt is undisputed that the Guidelines for disbursement of the pension is being followed by the authorized Banks in all cases under the Freedom Fighter's Pension Scheme/ SSS Yojana. Therefore, the impugned ietter dated 2g.Og .2022 rejecting the petitioner's request for arrear pension from I I . 1 1 .20 18 cannot be interfered with since the impugned letter is in accordance with the Guideiines.

7. Although counsel appearing for the petitioner argues that the responden[s [ook time to process the petitioner's application lrom March 202O onwarcls, the said submission is not acceptable in view of the Letter of Grant dated 18.03.2020 which makes it clear that there was no delay on the part of the respondents in processing the pelitioner's application. Moreover, the Notihcation relied on by the petitioner dated 10.10.2024 amendin g pata 5 2'2 in the matter of grant of dependent pension from the date of death of the pensioner makes il clear at clause 5 of the Nkation would come into force for all applications received on or after that the amendment $ 4

10.10.2024 The petitioner's application was admittedlv in March,

8. The ,tbor.e reasons are sufficient for holdinll that the petitioner is rrot entitled for the relief of arrear pension including on the grounds pleaded in the writ petition.

9. W.P.No 21452 of 2023 is accordingly dismissed. It is made clear that tlre respondents shall consider any represent,a.tion made by the petitioner for grant of interest on account of arry delay in payment of dependent pension to the petitioner. The -espondent shall consider and dispose of any representation, if made in this regard, within a period ol 10 weeks from the date of mak.ng of such represental-iorL.

10. Interim orders, if any, shall stand vacated and a1l connected applications are disposed o[. There shall be no order as 1.o cosls. //TRUE COPY// SD/. V.KAVITHA GISTRAR OFFICER To, Secretariat, t-lyderabad-500 004. Division, NDdC-ll Building, Sansad Marg, [ew Delhi-1 10 001

1. The secretary union of lndia, tvlinistry of Home_ Affairs, Froedom Fighters ' Z. ine- priircipal Secretary,"Government of Telangana, Reventte Department, 3. iG ahit'Minager, state Bank of India, centralised Pension Processing - Centre, tS'f oor,"SCRe Buildings, BankStreet, Koti,tlyderabad-s00 195' 4. One Cc to SRt. A. BHASKAR REDDY, Advocate [oPUC] 5. One CC to SRI K. L. N RAGHAVENDRA REDDY'CENTRAL 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE High Court for the State oF Telangana, at GOVERNMENT STANDING COUNSEL TOPUC] Hyderabad [Ol.JT]

7. Two CD CoPies BM BSR fk I ( o o rtl E r.r I4: ( i c t. 2 B i.tts 1025 t !r.5,,r r,1-* q_O t HIGH COURT DATED:0810112025 ORDER WP.No.21452 of 2023 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \o .4ton &s. (,