Freedom Fighter Pension: Supreme Court Grants Relief to Unmarried Daughter

The Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 4454 of 2016 ruled in favor of the appellant Philomina K.A. against the District Collector, Alappuzha, in a dispute regarding her entitlement to receive a freedom fighter’s pension under the Kerala Freedom Fighters’ Pension Rules, 1971. The case revolved around whether the appellant, an unmarried daughter of a deceased freedom fighter, was eligible to continue receiving the pension after the death of her parents.

The appellant’s father was a veteran freedom fighter who had been receiving a pension under the 1971 Rules from April 1, 1971, until his death on July 11, 1985. Following his demise, the pension was transferred to his wife, the appellant’s mother, who continued receiving it until she passed away on September 13, 2012. The appellant then applied for the pension on the grounds that she was an unmarried daughter and thus eligible under the 1971 Rules.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The appellant contended that:

• As per Rule 10 of the Kerala Freedom Fighters’ Pension Rules, unmarried daughters who have not become independent are eligible for the pension.
• The District Collector’s report confirmed that she was unmarried, had no independent income, and was living with her nephew after the death of her parents.
• She had no other source of financial support and was fully dependent on her father’s pension.

Respondents’ Arguments

The District Collector, Alappuzha, denied her request, arguing that:

• The appellant had a 25-year-old son from an extramarital relationship, which indicated that she was not dependent on her parents.
• Having a son meant she could not be considered “dependent” as per the rules governing pension eligibility.
• The pension was meant for those who were completely dependent on the deceased freedom fighter, and the appellant’s status did not meet that requirement.

Judgment

The Supreme Court analyzed Rule 10 of the 1971 Rules, which states:

“The widow/minor sons/unmarried daughters who have not otherwise become independent of a Freedom Fighter who has been sanctioned a pension under rule 6 shall be eligible to the continuance of the pension.”

The Court ruled that the appellant had fulfilled all the necessary conditions to be eligible for the pension. It stated:

“The High Court has committed an error in relying upon the fact that she has a son who was born of extra-marital relationship of hers with somebody ignoring the fact that he did not live with the appellant and is living with his wife at his wife’s house.”

The Court found that the appellant:

• Was unmarried and had never been married.
• Had no independent income and was living with her nephew after her mother’s death.
• Did not live with her son, who had moved to his wife’s house.

As a result, the Court allowed the appeal and ruled that the appellant was entitled to receive the pension from September 14, 2012, the day after her mother’s death. The Court directed the respondents to start paying her pension within one month and clear all arrears within two months.

Key Takeaways

• Unmarried daughters of deceased freedom fighters are entitled to receive pension benefits under the 1971 Rules if they have not become independent.
• Having a child does not automatically disqualify an unmarried daughter from receiving a pension.
• The ruling clarifies that financial dependence is a key criterion, rather than marital status alone.

This judgment reinforces the principle of ensuring financial security for dependents of freedom fighters, providing relief to unmarried daughters who rely on these pensions.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Philomina K.A. vs District Collector, Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 26-04-2016-1741854749529.pdf