Kifaytaullah Khan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1046768
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnMar-07-2013
AppellantKifaytaullah Khan
RespondentThe State of Madhya Pradesh
Excerpt:
writ appeal no ::1053. 2011 kifayatullah khan versus state of madhya pradesh and others.07.03.2013. shri a.k.singh for the appellant. challenging the order passed by the learned single judge on 23.8.2011, in writ petition no.4881/2010, this writ appeal has been filed under section 2 of the m.p.uchha nyayalaya (khand nyayapeeth ko appeal) adhiniyam, 2005. appellant claims to be a freedom fighter having participated in the goa liberation movement, in the year 1995. it is the case of the appellant that his claim for grant of freedom fighter’s pension has been rejected by the state government and by the writ court only on the ground that appellant has not undergone imprisonment even for a single day. it was tried to be emphasized that the appellant has produced documents to show that he had participated in the freedom movement. referring to the notification dated 18.9.1972, filed with annexure p/1, and the provisions of rule 15 therein, it was tried to be emphasized that as per this clarification contained in rule 15, the appellant had submitted a certificate with regard to his participation in the freedom movement and without taking note of the requirement of the circular and the notification, the claim is rejected. this aspect of the matter has been considered by the learned single judge and it is found that appellant has produced a certificate, which was filed as annexure p/3; this certificate is issued by one pandit bhagwandas saraswat, to show that appellant has participated in the goa liberation movement. however, after taking note of rule 3 of the mp swatantra 2 writ appeal no ::1053. 2011 kifayatullah khan versus state of madhya pradesh and others.sangram sainik samman nidhi niyam, 1972, it is held that for grant of freedom fighter’s pension, one of the criteria laid down is that the claimant has to remain under imprisonment for a minimum period of one day. it was found that as this criteria is not fulfilled by the appellant, his claim has been rightly rejected. the finding recorded by the learned single judge in this regard does not call for any interference. the appellant having not undergone imprisonment even for a single day and as the criteria, statutory in nature, laid down under the rules, are not fulfilled, no error is committed by the learned single judge in dismissing the writ petition. accordingly, finding no case made out for interference, the writ appeal is dismissed. ( s.a.bobde ) ( rajendra meno.) chief justice judge aks/-
Judgment:

Writ Appeal No ::

1053. 2011 Kifayatullah Khan versus State of Madhya Pradesh and otheRs.07.03.2013.

Shri A.K.Singh for the appellant.

Challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 23.8.2011, in Writ Petition No.4881/2010, this writ appeal has been filed under section 2 of the M.P.Uchha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005.

Appellant claims to be a freedom fighter having participated in the Goa Liberation Movement, in the year 1995.

It is the case of the appellant that his claim for grant of freedom fighter’s pension has been rejected by the State Government and by the writ court only on the ground that appellant has not undergone imprisonment even for a single day.

It was tried to be emphasized that the appellant has produced documents to show that he had participated in the freedom movement.

Referring to the Notification dated 18.9.1972, filed with Annexure P/1, and the provisions of Rule 15 therein, it was tried to be emphasized that as per this clarification contained in Rule 15, the appellant had submitted a certificate with regard to his participation in the freedom movement and without taking note of the requirement of the circular and the notification, the claim is rejected.

This aspect of the matter has been considered by the learned Single Judge and it is found that appellant has produced a certificate, which was filed as Annexure P/3; this certificate is issued by one Pandit Bhagwandas Saraswat, to show that appellant has participated in the Goa Liberation movement.

However, after taking note of Rule 3 of the MP Swatantra 2 Writ Appeal No ::

1053. 2011 Kifayatullah Khan versus State of Madhya Pradesh and otheRs.Sangram Sainik Samman Nidhi Niyam, 1972, it is held that for grant of freedom fighter’s pension, one of the criteria laid down is that the claimant has to remain under imprisonment for a minimum period of one day.

It was found that as this criteria is not fulfilled by the appellant, his claim has been rightly rejected.

The finding recorded by the learned Single Judge in this regard does not call for any interference.

The appellant having not undergone imprisonment even for a single day and as the criteria, statutory in nature, laid down under the Rules, are not fulfilled, no error is committed by the learned Single Judge in dismissing the writ petition.

Accordingly, finding no case made out for interference, the writ appeal is dismissed.

( S.A.BOBDE ) ( RAJENDRA MENo.) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE Aks/-