1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL  NO(S).  3671 OF 2018 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 507 OF 2016]

RAMBHAU S/O TULSHIRAM GHUGE                   Appellant(s)                                 VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.             Respondent(s) WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3672-3673 OF 2018 [[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.1502-1503 OF 2016]

WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3676 OF 2018

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 4731 OF 2016] WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3675 OF 2018 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 4730 OF 2016]

WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3678 OF 2018

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 4733 OF 2016] WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3674 OF 2018 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 4729 OF 2016]

WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3677 OF 2018

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 4732 OF 2016] WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3681 OF 2018 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 9464 OF 2018]

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) ….CC NO. 22021 OF 2016] WITH

2

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3679 OF 2018 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 37122 OF 2016]

WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3680 OF 2018

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 1165 OF 2018]  

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellants approached the High Court seeking freedom fighters' pension.  The High Court declined the prayer of the appellants.  Hence, these appeals. 3. A few similarly situated persons had approached this Court leading to the order dated 25th November, 2013 in Civil Appeal Nos. 10624-10636 of 2013.  The Judgment reads as follows :-

“1. Leave granted.   2.  The appellants, in this batch of appeals, are calling in question the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at  Aurangabad  in  Writ  Petition  No. 2106/2008, WP No. 2107/2008, WP No. 2112/2008, WP No. 2123/2008, WP No. 2144/2008, WP No. 2146/2008, WP No. 2147/2008, WP No. 2148/2008, WP No. 2152/2008, WP No. 2153/2008, WP No. 2156/2008, WP No. 2164/2008, WP No. 2165/2008 dated 14.10.2011.  By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has affirmed the orders passed

3

by  the  State  Government  cancelling the  pensionary  benefits  granted  to the appellants, presumably by relying on  the  report  of  Justice  Palkar Commission.

3. In  the  appeals  so  filed,  it  is specifically  averred  by  the appellants that they are all senior citizens.  They  also  submit  that  at this ripe age, if they are deprived of  the  pensionary  benefits,  they would not be in a position to eke out of their livelihood. They also submit that the freedom fighters pensionary benefit  so  granted  by  the  State Government  ought  not  to  have  been withdrawn by passing the order/(s) on subsequent dates.

4.  Per  contra,  the  learned  counsel appearing  for  the  State  of Maharashtra  submits  that  since  the appellants  had  obtained  the  freedom fighters pension by producing forged documents, they are not entitled for grant of any pensionary benefits and, therefore,  the  State  Government  was justified  in  withdrawing  the pensionary  benefits  so  granted  to them earlier.

5. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties to the lis.

4

6.  In  our  opinion,  keeping  in  view the  age  of  the  appellants  and  also keeping in view the fact that at this old  age,  if  small  benefit  that  was already granted to them is withdrawn, it  may  be  difficult  for  them  to sustain themselves. In that view of the matter, in the peculiar facts and circumstances  of  the  case,  the impugned judgment and order passed by the  High  Court  requires  to  be  set aside.

7. Accordingly,  we  allow  these appeals  and  set  aside  the  impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court.  We  further  direct  that  the pensionary  benefits  granted  by  the State Government will enure only to the benefit of the appellants and not to their legal heirs/representatives. After  the  bereavement  of  the appellant(s),  the  pensionary  benefit so  granted  by  the  State  Government will come to an end.

8.  Since  we  have  decided  these appeals  purely  on  facts  and circumstances  of  each  case,  we clarify that this Judgment shall not be  treated  as  a  precedent  in  any other case.

5

9. We quantify the arrears from the date  of  cancellation  of  the pensionary  benefits  till  date  at Rs.3,000/-  each  payable  to  the appellants  within  three  months  from the date of receipt of a copy of this Court's order. No order as to costs.”

4. Having gone through the pleadings, we are of the view that in the peculiar facts of the case, in the interest of justice and for doing complete justice, a similar  treatment  is  to  be  meted  out  to  the appellants herein also.  Accordingly, these appeals are disposed of in terms of the order as extracted above, making it further clear that the same may not be treated as a precedent.     

.......................J.               [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR ]

.......................J.               [ NAVIN SINHA]  

New Delhi; April 10, 2018.

6

ITEM NO.14               COURT NO.5               SECTION III                S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 507 OF 2016 RAMBHAU S/O TULSHIRAM GHUGE                        Appellant(s)                                 VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.            Respondent(s) (IA No.14485/2018-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS) WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.1502-1503 OF 2016 WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 4731 OF 2016 WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 4730 OF 2016 WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 4733 OF 2016 WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 4729 OF 2016 WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 4732 OF 2016 WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) ….CC NO. 22021 OF 2016] WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 37122 OF 2016 WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 1165 OF 2018 (IA  No.118584/2017-EXEMPTION  FROM  FILING  C/C  OF  THE  IMPUGNED JUDGMENT  and  IA  No.118582/2017-CONDONATION  OF  DELAY  IN  REFILING SLP)

7

 Date : 10-04-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA For Appellant(s) Mr. Sandeep S. Deshmukh, Adv.  

Mr. Nar Hari Singh, Adv.  Mr. Raghavendra Tripathi, Adv.  Mr. S. M. Jadhav, Adv.   

                   For M/S.  S.M. Jadhav And Company (Appearance slip not given)

                   For Respondent(s) Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR      

     UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following                              O R D E R

Leave granted.   The  civil  appeals  are  disposed  of  in  terms  of  the  signed

non-reportable Judgment.   Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA)                              (RENU DIWAN)    COURT MASTER                                ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)