Bureaucrats Must Realise That Benefits Received By Them Are Possible Due To Freedom Fighters: HP High Court On Denial Of Pension To Widow

The Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissed appeals filed by the Union of India and the State of Himachal Pradesh against the widow of a freedom fighter seeking pension.

The Court held that despite repeated reminders by the Supreme Court regarding the purpose of Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme the state authorities continued to deny pension on untenable grounds.

The Court further remarked that that the offices which the authorities are holding now and the benefits they are receiving have become possible because of the freedom fighters.

A division bench of Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Ranjan Sharma remarked that: “However, on the ground a different bureaucratic mindset is engrained so deep that it is hard for them to shake-off and realise that the benefits they are receiving while holding such offices, are only on account of the fact that the Freedom Fighters are responsible for their State of Affairs at this present point of time”.

Teg Singh, an active member of the Praja Mandal movement in Bilaspur and was sent out of the state in 1946. Thereafter in 1980 he applied for pension under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980.

Even though he produced a valid certificate confirming his participation externment from the former Home Minister and Superintendent of Police of Bilaspur State along with additional affidavits from other freedom fighters his claim was rejected by the authorities, stating that he did not produce records certificate.

However, Teg Ram died in 2008 and after that his widow applied and for the benefits.

In 2017 her petition was allowed, and it was directed that the financial assistance be granted under the updated Scheme i.e. Scheme for the Grant of Financial Assistance by the Government of Himachal Pradesh to the Freedom fighters of Himachal Pradesh.

Therefore, directions were issued to grant pension to her both under the Central Scheme and State Scheme.

The Union of India and State of Himachal Pradesh filed Letters Patent Appeals before the division bench against the judgement passed, by the Single Judge, contending that the evidence was not sufficient to claim pension.

However, the appeals were dismissed and the Court held that pension schemes for freedom fighters are beneficial legislations meant to honor sacrifices, not deny benefits.

Case Name: Union of India v/s Mahanti Devi and another, State of H.P. v/s Mahanti Devi and another

Case No.: LPA No. 102 of 2017 a/w LPA No.96 of 2017

Date of Decision: 03.09.2025

For the appellants: Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India [Senior Advocate] with Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant in LPA No.102 of 2017.

Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional Advocate General, for the appellant in LPA No.96 of 2017.

For the Respondents: Ms. Vandana Kuthiala and Mr. Devi Singh, Advocates, for respondent No.1 in LPA No.102 of 2017.

Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.2-State in LPA No.102 of 2017.

Ms. Vandana Kuthiala and Mr. Devi Singh, Advocates, for respondent No.1 in LPA No.96 of 2017.

Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India [Senior Advocate] with Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2-UOI in LPA No.96 of 2017.

Click Here To Read/Download Order