R. Banumathi JUDGMENT
R. Banumathi, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal by way of special leave impugns the final judgment and order dated 01.04.2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in LPA No. 1348 of 2012 whereby the High Court allowed the LPA No. 1348 of 2012 filed by the Respondents herein and thereby declined Appellant's claim of dependent family pension under Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980.
3. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are as follows: The Appellant is the widow of one Late Hari Kant Jha who had been accused and arrested in a criminal case emanating from freedom struggle movement of 9th August, 1942. The deceased took part in the freedom struggle and allegedly remained absconding in this context from 16.08.1942 to 14.10.1944. The deceased was arrested on 14.10.1944 and remained in jail till he was released on bail on 27.10.1944. He was thereafter discharged from the case on 25.01.1945. Late Hari Kant Jha filed an application seeking pension under Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 ("the Scheme"), which was subsequently pursued by his wife that is the Appellant herein. The State Government vide letter dated 06.04.1993 recommended for sanction of Freedom Fighter Honour Pension to the Appellant. It was however, noted in the recommendation letter as well as the jail certificate produced by the Appellant that Hari Kant Jha was detained in jail for thirteen days only. Declining the State Government's recommendation, the Central Government vide order dated 26.07.2000 rejected the Appellant's claim on the ground that the statutory mandate of serving minimum six months in detention was not fulfilled in the case of the deceased.
4. The Central Government's order dated 26.07.2000 was assailed by the Appellant in C.W.J.C. No. 9903 of 2001 filed before the High Court. The Single Judge allowed the writ petition vide judgment dated 25.08.2006, holding that the period for which Hari Kant Jha remained in jail is quite insignificant in the light of the fact that he remained underground for a period of around two years, which is sufficient for making the deceased entitled for compensation under the Act and directed the concerned authority to pass a fresh order in accordance with law considering the aforesaid documents. The Central Government once again rejected the application of the Appellant by order dated 15.11.2006, on the ground that the Appellant did not produce any satisfactory primary or secondary evidence.
5. Challenging the order dated 15.11.2006, the Appellant filed C.W.J.C. No. 816 of 2008. The Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 11.01.2011 disposed the writ petition on the ground that the findings of the Central Government are not in-consonance with the observations of the High Court made in its order dated 25.08.2006 while disposing of C.W.J.C. No. 9903 of 2001. The said order dated 11.01.2011 passed by the Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 816 of 2008 was challenged by the Respondents by way of appeal in LPA No. 1348 of 2012. The said appeal was allowed by the Division Bench of the High Court by the impugned order holding that the Single Judge had allowed the claim of the Appellant without noticing that no document was produced by the Appellant proving the fact that the deceased remained underground for more than six months. The High Court further held that "....the Central Government has clearly pointed out that the applicant did not meet the eligibility criteria of either b........