Fictitious Claims Of Honorarium By Persons Claiming To Be Freedom Fighter Is To Be Dealt With Sternly: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by M V Srinivasa Gowda, challenging an order passed by Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District, directing initiation of proceedings against him to recover the entire amount paid as honorarium to him under the Karnataka State Freedom Fighters Welfare Rules, 1969.

In doing so the court underscored that the object of the scheme is to provide pension to the genuine freedom fighters who deserve to be treated with reverence, and if  applications without proof are entertained the "scheme would be converted into a bounty". 

A division bench of Justice S G Pandit and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar said “All care has to be taken to see that real freedom fighters do not suffer and their claims are accepted, but, at the same time, fictitious claims have to be sternly dealt with on merits.”

Background

A complaint was made by one Nagaraj on August 1, 2015 alleging that the petitioner is falsely claiming honorarium by producing fabricated documents. The Lokayukta had sent it to the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District for conducting enquiry and to submit a report.

After enquiry the Commissioner had directed the Tahsildhar, Mulbagal Taluk vide letter dated November 14, 2018 to initiate proceedings against the petitioner and recover the entire amount paid as honorarium to him. Later, the tahsildar had issued notice dated May 20, 2019 and called upon the petitioner to refund Rs.9,08,661, within 30.5.2019 failing which, legal action will be initiated. Following which the petitioner approached the high court.

The petitioner contended that he is a freedom fighter and as per the Government Order of grant of monthly honorarium to the freedom fighters, he applied and accordingly, the Government of Karnataka granted monthly honorarium to the petitioner at Rs.100 per month.

Further, because of a false complaint lodged by respondent no.6 before the Lokayukta, it was referred by the Registrar Enquiry-VI to the Deputy Commissioner to conduct enquiry.

The government opposed the plea saying that by placing fabricated documents before the authority concerned, illegally the petitioner was able to get the freedom fighter's pension. It came to the knowledge of the authorities only when the complaint was referred for investigation.

Further, there is no illegality or perversity in passing such orders to refund the honorarium received by the petitioner illegally. No fault can be found with the authorities concerned.

Findings

The bench referred to Section 8 of Karnataka Lokayukta Act. It then said, “On perusal of the provisions of Section 8 of the Act, certain complaints cannot be investigated by the Lokayukta. But, the complaint allegations as per the petition averments show that, this petitioner is receiving the freedom fighter's honorarium by producing the fabricated documents. That means, there is a grievance of fabricating the documents in getting the honorarium therefore, a complaint is lodged”. 

It noted that the object of the scheme is, to provide pension to the genuine freedom fighters who deserve to be treated with reverence, respect and honour.

Referring to the documents produced by the petitioner to claim the honorarium before the authority the court said “For how many days, months years the petitioners was in jail is not stated in this document”. 

Elaborating on the requirements made under the provisions of the Scheme the court said that the applicant freedom fighter should submit the certificate stating as to what type of problems and hardships he had to face on account of participation in freedom movement, is to be explained. He should fulfil the criteria that the if had to remain away from house and family, whether he had to give up education or he was expelled by any educational institution, whether he was beaten up by the police in such a manner that he has become disabled.

Further, It should be certified by two freedom fighters of their respective areas who had either undergone atleast two years imprisonment or those who had been declared absconded or who had been absconding for at least two years, the court noted. Such a certificate should be accompanied with the copies of jail certificate about the imprisonment or copies of govt. orders or an advertisement declaring the freedom fighter as absconder. Even the certified copy of the Government record, if available with regard to imprisonment, so also the original newspaper describing his name etc., so also recommending opinion, it noted.

The bench then said “In this case, no such documents are made available to show that really the petitioner had participated in the freedom struggle.”

Following which it held “We are of the considered view that, by entertaining applications like the one presented by the petitioner without any proof regarding his participation in freedom struggle which has been dealt with by the respondent no.1 to 5 on investigation and directing to take necessary action to get refund of the honorarium received, cannot be found fault with.”

It added “If such applications are entertained, the scheme would be converted into a bounty and those who have actually rendered valuable sacrifices may remain deprived. This would amount to abuse of scheme.”

Dismissing the petition it said “There is no acceptable evidence placed on record by the petitioner to grant the relief so claimed by him in the petition.”

Case Title: M V Srinivas Gowda AND State of Karnataka & Others

Appearance: Senior Advocate G Papi Reddy for Advocate Varun Papi Reddy for Petitioner.

AGA Bhojegowda T Koller For R1, R3, R5.

Advocate K Prasanna Shetty For R2.

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 497

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.27154 OF 2019

Click Here To Read/Download Order