P. Sathasivam, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 30.01.2006 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in L.P.A. No. 710 of 2005 whereby the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the respondent herein and set aside the order passed by the learned single Judge.
(2.) Brief facts: (a) According to the appellant, he is a freedom fighter, who sacrificed his studies in the freedom struggle and had taken active part in the 1942 agitation and was forced to remain an absconder for more than four years i.e. from 20.08.1942 till September, 1946 as he was made an accused in G.R. Case No. 985 of 1942 and in Mokama P.S. Case No. 259 (8) of 1942 titled State v. Mahender Singh and Ors., relating to the incidents of burning and damaging of a post office, railway line etc. at Mokama during freedom struggle. In 1972, Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme was introduced by the Government of India for the grant of pension to living freedom fighters and their families. In 1980, the benefit of the Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 (formerly known as Rs. the Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme, 1972) was extended to all the Freedom fighters as a token of Samman (respect) to them. (b) On 07.09.1981, the appellant herein filed an application for pension under the Scheme which was registered on 20.06.1981. After a detailed enquiry by the Bihar Government, the matter was placed before the Advisory Board on 12/13.12.1995 which recommended for release of pension to the appellant w.e.f. 01.08.1980. In the absence of any reply, the appellant again on 09.04.1997 sent a letter to the Government for releasing his pension. Thereafter on 19.09.1997, the appellant sent a notice through his advocate which remained unreplied. On 15.12.1997, the appellant filed a petition being W.P. No. 1248 of 1998 before the High Court of Delhi. Vide order dated 26.03.1998, the petition was withdrawn by the appellant on the assurance of the learned Counsel for the respondents therein that as and when they got the clarifications sought for in the representation of the appellant, the representation shall be disposed of. The High Court further directed the Government to take a decision on the representation within three months of the receipt of the clarifications. Not getting any reply from the Government, on 17.07.1998, the appellant sent a reminder to the respondent. On 10.12.1998, the appellant filed a Contempt Petition bearing C.C.P. No. 489 of 1998 before the High Court in which a show cause notice was issued to the Government for non-complying with its order. However, on 17.12.1998, the appellant got a registered letter from the Government refusing to grant him the freedom fighter pension. On 17.04.2001, the High Court dismissed the contempt petition and observed that if the appellant herein is aggrieved of the order of rejection of his grant of pension by the Government, he may pursue appropriate remedy provided in law. (c) Against the rejection of the freedom fighter pension, on 28.11.2001, the appellant filed W.P.(C) No. 7439 of 2001 before the High Court and the same was allowed on 24.11.2003 by the learned single Judge with costs quantified at Rs. 10,000/- and also directed the Government to grant pension to the appellant under the Scheme w.e.f. 01.08.1980. On not being released the pension by the Government, the appellant filed a contempt petition on 08.09.2004. Challenging the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 24.11.2003 in W.P. (C) No. 7439 of 2001, the Government filed L.P.A. No. 710 of 2004 before the Division Bench of the High Court. Vide order dated 30.01.2006, the Division Bench allowed the L.P.A. and set aside the order of the learned single Judge. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has preferred this appeal by way of special leave petition before this Court.
(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the appellant as well as the respondent.;