IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. PANDIT WRIT APPEAL No.1487 OF 2018 (GM-RES) c/w WRIT APPEAL No.1488 OF 2018 (GM-RES) AND WRIT APPEAL Nos.2249-2251 OF 2018 IN W.A.NO.1487 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-110 011.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI. M.UNNIKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI. M.S.L.NARASIMHAN GENERAL SECRETARY, KARNATAKA STATE GOA FREEDOM FIGHTERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, #73/2, 3RD CROSS, SRIRAMPURAM, BENGALURU-560 021.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N. DILLI RAJAN, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT No.1 SRI. S.S. MAHENDRA, AGA FOR RESPONDENT No.2) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT THEREBY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION NO.52027/2014 [GM- RES] DATED 05/02/2018 AND THEREBY DISMISS THE SAID PETITION.
IN W.A.NO.1488 OF 2018 AND W.A.NOS.2249-51 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, FREEDOM FIGHTERS DIVISION, 2ND FLOOR, NEW DELHI, CITY CENTRE – II, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI – 110 011.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI. M. UNNIKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE KARNATAKA STATE GOA FREEDOM FIGHTERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI. T.G.GOVINDARAJ, SON OF LATE K. ETHIRAJULU NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, NO.62, ARUNACHALA MUDALIAR ROAD, SHIVAJINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. SRI. G. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, SON OF LATE V. GANAPATHY, NO.106/54, 11TH CROSS, 11TH MAIN, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU – 560 003.
3. SRI. NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, SON OF BAICHE GOWDA, NO.56/10, 59TH B CROSS, 4TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 010.
4. SRI. L.V. RAJU, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, SON OF LATE LOKIAH RAJU, NO.58, III MAIN, BARODA COLONY, J.P.NAGAR 1ST PHASE, PUTTENAHALLI, BENGALURU – 560 018.
5. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY D.P.A.R.(AR) – POLITICAL DIVISION-1, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R.SHAILENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR CAVEATOR/RESPONDENT No.1 SRI. B. VISWESHWARAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT Nos.2 to 4 SRI. S.S. MAHENDRA, AGA FOR RESPONDENT No.5) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT THEREBY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION NOS.54987-990/2014 [GM-RES] DATED 20/11/2017 AND THEREBY DISMISS THE SAID PETITIONS.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, S.G.PANDIT J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
COMMON JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the impugned orders dated 05.02.2018 and 20.11.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.Nos.52027 of 2014 and W.P.Nos.54987-54990 of 2014, by which the petitions were disposed off, the respondent No.1-Union of India is in appeal.
2. Since, both the appeals involve identical facts and common question of law arises for consideration, with the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, both the appeals were taken up for hearing together and disposed off by this common order.
3. The petitioner in writ petition No.52027 of 2014 filed writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondent to consider the representation dated 10.02.2014 (Annexure- A1) and to consider the petitioner’s case as special case in view of his age and sacrifices made to the freedom movement and direct the respondent-Authorities to provide central pension from the date of introduction of the Central Pension Scheme by Union Government to the petitioner on similar grounds as provided to the petitioners of other States. Further to hold notification bearing No.F.No.8/10/99-FF(P) dated 17.02.2003 which excludes Karnataka freedom fighters from Central Government Pension Scheme to be discriminatory and arbitrary under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
4. The petitioners in writ petition Nos.54987-54990 of 2014 filed writ petition to quash endorsement bearing No.124/7272/2013-FF(WZ) dated 24/25.10.2013 and for a direction to the respondents to extend equal payment to the petitioners by considering and granting the pension under the “Swatantra Sainik Samman” Pension Scheme with all consequential benefits.
5. It is stated that the “Swatantra Sainik Samman” Pension Scheme was introduced in the year 1980 with the object of providing grant of pension to the living freedom fighters and their dependants after their death. Under the above scheme pension is given to the freedom fighters of various freedom movements. One of such freedom movement is Goa Liberation Movement, in which freedom fighters had undergone sufferings at the hands of Portuguese Authorities spread over in 3 phases from 1946 to 1961.
6. The petitioner in W.P.No.52027 of 2014 is of 81 years of age and states that he is a freedom fighter who participated in Goa Liberation Movement. In W.P.Nos.54987-54990 of 2014, the 1st petitioner is Goa Freedom Fighters Welfare Association and petitioners 2 to 4 were aged 82, 78 and 85 respectively, claiming that they are the Members of the 1st petitioner-Association and they have participated in the Goa Liberation Movement.
7. It is stated that the State of Karnataka had sanctioned State pension to the participants of Goa Liberation Movement in the early 1980’s. But the said Pension Scheme was kept in abeyance since the State Government noticed certain irregularities in claiming the pension under the Scheme. It is stated that the petitioner in W.P.No.52027 of 2014 is getting pension from Karnataka State under Goa Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme. It is stated that subsequently noticing the irregularities in claiming pension, the State of Karnataka kept the scheme in abeyance in the year 1995. But subsequently, from 01.08.2002 the State Government restarted granting pension to persons who participated in the Goa Liberation Movement. It is stated that the petitioners are entitled for pension under “Swatantra Sainik Samman” Scheme as they have participated in the Goa Freedom Movement. In that respect, the petitioners state that they have made representation to the respondents for sanction of pension. As the respondent- Union of India failed to consider their representations, they approached this Court by filing the instant writ petitions.
8. The respondents resisted the petitioners’ prayer on the ground that as on the date of Central Government introducing “Swatantra Sainik Samman” Pension Scheme in the year 2002, there was no Pension Scheme existing in the State of Karnataka and as such, the petitioners are not entitled for the pension as sought for by them. The learned Single Judge considering the rival contentions disposed off the writ petitions directing the respondents to consider the representations and to grant the Goa Liberation Pension to the petitioners. Hence, the respondent-Union of India is in appeal.
9. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-Union of India and learned counsels for the respondents in both the writ appeals. Perused the appeal papers.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the order of the learned Single Judge is wholly erroneous and the learned Single Judge could not have directed the respondent-Union of India to sanction Goa Liberation Pension by considering the representation of the petitioners. It is contended that as on the cut off date i.e., 01.08.2002, the State Government had no Pension Scheme for the persons who participated in Goa Liberation Movement. As such, the petitioners are not entitled for consideration of their case for pension. It is stated that as the Pension Scheme in the State of Karnataka had been withdrawn in the year 1995, the persons from Karnataka are not eligible for pension. It is stated that the petitioners would not satisfy the criteria for sanction of pension. Thus, prays for allowing the writ appeal.
11. Per contra, learned counsels for the respondents would submit that, only because there was no Pension Scheme existing in the State of Karnataka as on the cut off date i.e, 01.08.2002, the petitioners cannot be denied pension under “Swatantra Sainik Samman” Pension Scheme. It is stated that similarly placed persons in the other States have been granted pension.
12. On hearing the learned counsels for the parties and on going through the appeal papers including the order of the learned Single Judge, we are of the view that the appellant has not made out any ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. In sum and substance, the one and only ground urged by the appellant is that as on the cut off date prescribed i.e., 01.08.2002, the Pension Scheme for persons who participated in the Goa Liberation Movement was not in existence in the State of Karnataka. It is not in dispute that the State of Karnataka by Government Order dated 29.01.1991 granted pension to the persons who participated in the Goa Liberation Movement of 1955-56. The said Government Order indicated that the Scheme shall come into force from 01.01.1991. Subsequently, noticing large number of irregularities in identifying the persons who participated in the Goa Liberation Movement and in the absence of material to indicate that such persons who claim pension were in prison, the State Government withdrew the Government Order under which pension was sanctioned to the persons who participated in the Goa Liberation Movement by Government Order dated 19.04.1995. Subsequently, under Government Order dated 31.03.2008 with certain conditions sanctioned the pension of Rs.2,000/- to the persons who participated in the Goa Liberation Movement. It is not the case that in the State of Karnataka there was no pension scheme for the persons who participated in the Goa Freedom Movement. Therefore, the contention of the appellant that there was no scheme of pension cannot be accepted. Under Annexure-D, letter dated 17.04.2013 addressed to the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Karnataka, it is noticed that the Central Government noted that 984 persons are getting pension but, as on the cut off date 01.08.2002, the petitioners were not getting State pension, hence they were not eligible for “Swatantra Sainik Samman” Pension Scheme. But in the letter dated 15.05.2013 from State Government to Central Government, the State Government has given certain clarifications which are as follows:
Clarification sought by Government of India 4. Several cases filed before High Court/ Supreme Court by the applicants of Kerala State have been considered by Government of India for the reason that Kerala State had granted Goa Pension before 01-03-2002.
5. In the Karnataka State Goa Pension Scheme was not in existence at the time (during the year 2002) When Government of India took Central Cabinet approval for Sanction of Central Goa State Government Replies The decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court has been examined by the Karnataka Government. Since Karnataka Government has given pensions right from 1991, the case of Karnataka State is also required to be considered by Government of India on the lines of Kerala State Although the order passed by Kerala HC/SC is applicable to Kerala State only, the case of Karnataka State is also similar in nature. The Government of India was requested to give similar relief to Karnataka Pension to other States.
Further the order passed by Kerala High Court Supreme Court are applicable to Kerala State only and the State of Karnataka is not covered by the order of Kerala HC/SC pensioners in order to avoid their going through the judicial channel unnecessarily, as the point of law has been well established.
13. Since, the State of Karnataka had sanctioned pension to the persons who participated in the Goa Liberation Movement in the year 1991 itself and for a certain period between 1995-2008, the State Government had discontinued and subsequently from 2008 again payment of pension was restored, the petitioners’ case are also entitled to be considered for sanction of pension under the “Swatantra Sainik Samman” Pension Scheme. The learned Single Judge after going through the order passed by the High Court of Kerala, in writ petition No.37460 of 2007 and connected petitions has rightly directed for the consideration of petitioners’ case for pension. We find no illegality or erroneousness in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
14. No ground is made out to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the writ appeals are rejected.
In view of dismissal of the appeals, pending IAs do not survive for consideration.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE SMJ CT:KVH