Writ Petition No. 2699 of 2009. Case: Swarna Lakshmi Narayana Vs The Special Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi and two Others. High Court of Andhra Pradesh (India)
| Case Number | Writ Petition No. 2699 of 2009 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Sri K.Chinna Baba, Adv. and For Respondents: Sri Adhi Venkateshwarlu, Adv. |
| Judges | Noushad Ali and Akula Venkata Sesha Sai, JJ. |
| Issue | Constitution of India - Articles 14, 21 |
| Judgement Date | April 11, 2014 |
| Court | High Court of Andhra Pradesh (India) |
Order:
-
Initially, the petitioner herein filed this writ petition assailing Lr. No. 112/6197/97-FF(HC)(A), dated 04.08.2006 of the first respondent herein, suspending the Freedom Fighters Pension for the petitioner and to set aside the guideline (b) in Do.Lr.No.8/12/90 FF(P), dated 02.07.1998, of the first respondent herein, which enables consideration of age on the basis of voters list as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
-
While ordering Rule nisi, this Court in W.P.M.P.No.3466/2009 on 03.07.2009, passed an interim order, directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 24.12.2008 and to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order. The first respondent by virtue of an order in Lr.No.52/CC/25/2009-FF(HC), dated 21.04.2009, cancelled the pension granted earlier and by virtue of Lr.No.52/CC/25/2009-FF(HC) dated 28.10.2009, the first respondent reaffirmed the same during the pendency of the writ petition.
-
According to the petitioner herein, he fought against Nizam Government for the merger of Hyderabad State into Indian Union and made an application for grant of Freedom Fighters Pension and the same was assigned File No.112/6197/97-FF(HC)A and was placed before the Hyderabad Special Screening Committee in the year 1997 and the said committee recommended the case of the petitioner for grant of Freedom Fighters Pension. The State Government, after verification, as per the policy of the Union of India, recommended for the same and basing on which, the first respondent issued preliminary pension sanction vide Lr.No.112/6197/97-FF(HC)A, dated 29.07.2003, calling for descriptive rolls and accordingly the petitioner herein submitted all the required documents and descriptive rolls to the first respondent and the first respondent granted pension with effect from 15.07.2003 in favour of the petitioner vide Lr.No.112/6197/97-FF(HC)(A), dated 04.11.2003. The first respondent vide Lr.No.112/6197/97-FF(HC)(A), dated 04.08.2006 suspended the freedom fighters pension. Questioning the same, petitioner herein filed W.P.No.20246/2006 on 29.06.2006 and initially on 27.12.2006 interim order was granted by this Court and subsequently the same was vacated and the said W.P.No.20246/2006 was dismissed by this Court on 01.03.2007. Subsequently, while narrating further developments, the petitioner herein filed the present writ petition, seeking suspension of the order dated 04.08.2006 and subsequently this Court granted permission to question the order of cancellation dated 21.04.2009 as confirmed in the letter dated 28.10.2009 of the first respondent.
-
In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent, it is averred that the Government of Andhra Pradesh vide letter dated 29.06.2006 reported that on receipt of a complaint regarding the claim of the petitioner to be a freedom fighter, an enquiry was conducted by the District Collector, Khammam and recommended for cancellation of the pension sanctioned earlier in favour of the petitioner herein. It is further stated in the said counter affidavit that a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the first respondent on 04.08.2006 to explain as to why the pension should not be cancelled and reply was given by the petitioner herein on 03.10.2006.
-
Heard Sri K.Chinna Baba, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Adhi Venkateswarlu, learned counsel for the Union of India and perused the material available on record.
-
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner herein that simply basing on the letter addressed by the State Government and without any enquiry and without giving any opportunity to the petitioner, the first respondent passed the impugned orders of suspension and thereafter cancellation.
-
It is further contended that earlier basing on the report submitted by the State Government after through verification, the first respondent granted pension in favour of the petitioner herein as long back as in the year 2003. It is further submitted that without issuing any notice and opportunity of being heard to the petitioner herein, the second respondent herein recommended for cancellation and simply basing on the same, the first respondent cancelled the pension granted in favour of the petitioner. It is also...
To continue reading
Request your trial