Government Of India, vs Mulugu Rajaiah,
2023 Latest Caselaw 3330 Tel

         THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
                                      AND
         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR


                  WRIT APPEAL No.1099 of 2010

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)


       Mr. M.Rama Krishna, learned counsel representing

Mr. Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General

of India for the appellants.


2.     This intra Court appeal emanates from the order

dated 25.08.2003 passed by the learned Single Judge by

which the writ petition preferred by respondents No.1 to 4,

namely W.P.No.24709 of 1999, has been disposed of with a

direction to the appellants herein to release the pension

and arrears of pension within a period of four weeks.


3.     Facts

giving rise to filing of this writ appeal briefly

stated are that respondents No.1 to 4 are freedom fighters.

They were sanctioned pension with effect from 01.08.1980

under the Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme, 1972.

However, by a communication dated 21.03.1990, the

payment of pension was stopped on the ground that on an

enquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation, it was

found that they have obtained sanction order by playing

fraud. Thereupon, a criminal case was registered against

them, namely C.C.No.189 of 1988. The Court of

V Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, vide judgment

dated 30.05.1996, convicted the accused for the offences

under Sections 120-B, 410, 468 and 471 of IPC. On

appeal, the appellate Court, vide judgment dated

15.04.1997, has acquitted the accused. The operative

portion of the judgment passed by the appellate Court

reads as under:

In the result, Criminal Appeal Nos.197/96 and 198/96 are allowed. The convictions and sentences passed by the Lower Court against the appellants/accused (A-1, A-3 to A-8, A-11 and A-12) in these appeals are set aside and they are acquitted of all the charges. Their bail bonds are cancelled and they are set at liberty. Criminal Appeal No.204/96 and Appeal No.208/96 are dismissed. The convictions and sentences passed by the lower court against the appellants (A-10 and A-9) in these two appeals are confirmed.

4. Admittedly, the aforesaid order of acquittal has

attained finality as the appellants have not assailed the

same before a higher forum.

5. Thereupon, respondents No.1 to 4 have filed the writ

petition in which a direction was sought to the appellants

herein to release the pension.

6. The learned Single Judge, by the impugned order

dated 25.08.2003, has directed the appellants herein to

release the pension and arrears of pension within a period

of four weeks. The appellants also filed an application

seeking review of the order, which was dismissed by the

learned Single Judge by an order dated 09.02.2005. In the

aforesaid factual background, this intra Court appeal has

been filed.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that

the learned Single Judge grossly erred in directing the

appellants to make payment of pension to respondents

No.1 to 4. It is also submitted that the order passed by the

learned Single Judge is contrary to the law, weight of

evidence and probabilities of the case.

8. We have considered the submissions made by

learned counsel for the appellants.

9. It is not in dispute that respondents No.1 to 4 have

been acquitted by the appellate Court vide judgment dated

15.04.1997. It is also not in dispute that the aforesaid

judgment has attained finality, as the same has not been

challenged by the appellants in any higher forum.

Therefore, the action of the appellants herein to withhold

the pension, which was sanctioned to respondents No.1

to 4 cannot be said to be justified in law. The learned

Single Judge has rightly directed the appellants to release

the pension, which is due to respondents No.1 to 4.

10. For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find any

merit in this writ appeal. The same fails and is hereby

dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ

______________________________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR, J

19.10.2023 vs