The Madras High Court has set aside an order of the Writ Court whereby it was held that once the State Government extended the benefit of the Freedom Fighter Pension Scheme, the Central Government had to extend the same. The High Court also held that it cannot expand the scope of the pension scheme as it would fall beyond the realm of the powers of judicial review.

The Union of India preferred the writ petition before the High Court on the ground that the applicant/deceased freedom fighter was ineligible to avail the Central Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme, since the requisite eligibility criteria were not complied with.

The Division Bench of Justice S.M.Subramaniam and Justice C. Kumarappan held, “The eligibility condition prima facie states that all the persons, who participated in the freedom movement in some way or the other is not eligible for SSS Pension Scheme. Therefore, Freedom Fighters, who satisfies the condition stipulated under the SSS scheme alone is eligible for Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme. High Court cannot expand the scope of pension scheme, and it would fall beyond the realm of the powers of judicial review. If at all, respondent could able to secure all the essential certificates and produce the same to the competent authorities, then alone the case is to be considered under the Scheme.”

Central Government Standing Counsel R.Sanjay represented the Appellant while Advocate C.S. Jeyaprakash represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The Freedom Fighter instituted the writ petition, and on account of his death, his legal heirs were substituted. The Freedom Fighter filed an affidavit stating that he participated in the freedom struggle in Coimbatore District, which was organised against the British Government. It was his case that he participated in the Quit India Movement and several other agitations against the British Government. Since the State Government Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme was granted to the Freedom Fighter, he submitted an application seeking Freedom Fighters Pension under the Central Scheme. The Competent Authority of the Central Government rejected the same. Thus, a writ petition was instituted.

The Writ Court formed an opinion that once the State Government extended the benefit of the Freedom Fighter Pension Scheme, then the Central Government has to extend the same, and the eligibility criteria fixed by the Central Government scheme need not be followed strictly.

Reasoning

Affirming that the welfare scheme is a concession extended to Freedom Fighters, recognising their contributions during the freedom struggle, the Bench held that the welfare schemes and concessions ought to be implemented scrupulously by following the terms and conditions. “High Court in exercise of powers of judicial review cannot expand the scope of the policy decisions, especially in the matter of grant of pension to Freedom Fighters or to any other persons under Special Schemes. In the event of diluting the terms and conditions of the scheme, it will result in opening of Pandora’s box and many such ineligible persons will seek benefits under the scheme, which would result in financial loss to the exchequer. Therefore, welfare schemes are to be implemented scrupulously in terms and conditions as stipulated”, it added.

Referring to the conditions stipulated under the SSS Scheme,1980, dated August 15, 1981, under which the respondent submitted an application seeking Freedom Fighter Pension, the Bench stated that there was no automatic extension of the Central Government Pension scheme, since the conditions are specifically stipulated under the SSS Scheme. “Thus, for grant of Central pension, the Central Government scheme is to be followed”, it added.

Considering that the authorities found that the required documents had not been produced, the Bench held that the respondent would bed be at liberty to collect the required documents and re-present the application. “Writ Court has taken a view that eligibility criteria need not be strictly adopted in each and every case, and such a view is running counter to the legal principles settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and expansion of the scope of scheme is impermissible”, it stated.

Thus, setting aside the writ order, the Bench allowed the Appeal.

Cause Title: The Government Of India v. S.Somasundaram(deceased) (Case No.: WA No. 806 of 2022)

Appearance

Appellant: Central Government Standing Counsel R.Sanjay, Deputy Solicitor General Of India R.Rajesh Vivekananthan

Respondent: Advocate C.S. Jeyaprakash, Special Government Pleader S.Senthil Murugan

Click here to read/download Order


Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.