'Don't Employ A Hypertechical Approach' : Kerala High Court Directs State To Re-Consider INA Veteran's Application For Pension

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday directed the State government to reconsider the application moved by an Indian National Army (INA) veteran for a Central government pension scheme on the ground that his application was rejected for hypertechnical grounds.

Justice Murali Purushothaman recorded that the petitioner's application was rejected mechanically without any application of mind. 

"The 2nd respondent (State) has refused to recommend the application of Sri.Edadan Chindan Nair for reasons which are incorrect and hyper technical. Ext.P6 been passed without application of mind. Ext.P6 is, therefore, set aside. To meet the ends of justice, the 2nd respondent shall reconsider Ext.P5 application and take a decision, afresh."

The Court also added that there were many freedom fighters whose sacrifices and names were not known to the common man.

"We remember and honour the freedom fighters who fought for the independence of the Country. But, there are many unsung heroes of freedom struggle whose names and contributions we have not even heard of."

As a token of respect for the sacrifices of freedom fighters, the Central Government had launched a pension scheme called 'Swathantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme' (SSSP).

The 94-year-old petitioner had applied for SSSP in 2008. However, the State refused to recommend his application to the Centre on the ground that only persons who had suffered imprisonment for a minimum of six months are eligible for the pension. 

Challenging this refusal, the petitioner had approached the Court. Unfortunately, during the pendency of the proceedings, the petitioner passed away in 2009. So when the matter came up in 2021, his widow and son were impleaded as additional petitioners.

The petitioners claimed that he had served the INA led by Netaji Subash Chandra Bose. The veteran had also produced evidence to this effect and to prove that he had been granted Kerala Freedom Fighters' Pension by the State. 

Further, appearing through Advocate Kaleeswaram Raj, he contended that he was captured as a prisoner at Mandale and sent to Rangoon Central Jail for 6 months. 

However, in the State's order, it was alleged that the petitioner's claimed suffering was only three months and that the eligibility of the certifier was not known in the absence of jail records. Moreover, it was stated that there was no documentary evidence during 1943-45 about his association with INA.  

Government Pleader K.M. Faisal argued that the certificate issued to the petitioner by the All India INA Committee cannot be considered as conclusive proof of his participation in the INA Movement.

However, he later submitted that upon searching on Google, he found several news items and writings about the petitioner and his association with INA and Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose.

The Court noted that there were biographical as well other news items of the petitioner.

"The news items and the web contents cannot be substituted for documents in support of his claim for SSS Pension. However, these articles published in newspapers and websites show that, though lesser-known, he was part of our freedom struggle.'"

Upon perusing the files relating to the petitioner's KFFP application, Justice  Purushothaman noted that the District Advisory Committee under the KFFP scheme found the petitioner eligible considering the certificate issued by the All India INA Committee. 

Moreover, the Court noted that in his application, the petitioner had specifically stated that he was sent to Rangoon Central Jail and detained for six months. Therefore, it was observed that the finding that the claimed suffering of the applicant is only three months is factually incorrect. 

Reliance was also placed on Gurdial Singh v. Union of India [(2001) 8 SCC 8], which analysed the objects of the SSSP Scheme.

In this background, the Court found that the State had refused to recommend the petitioner's application for SSSP without keeping in mind the object of the scheme. 

"The authorities are required to adopt a rational and not a technical approach in considering the application for pension. Without proper application of mind, the 2nd respondent (State) has issued Ext.P6 refusing to recommend the case of Sri.Edadan Chindan Nair for SSS Pension."

The Court also referred to its decision in Augusthy Mathai v. Union of India [2008 (1) KHC 977], where it had deprecated the hyper-technical approach and insistence of minute details for considering an application for grant of Freedom Fighters' pension.

As such, the State was directed to reconsider the petitioner's application. 

Since he is no more and it is not possible to get fresh records relating to his participation in the INA movement or detention in prison, the application was to be considered on the basis of the probabilities brought out by Gurdial Singh (supra).

Therefore, a fresh decision on the application was directed to be taken with notice to the additional petitioners within four months

Case Title: Edadan Chindan Nair & Ors v. Union of India & Ors.

Click Here To Read/Download The Order