The Court affirmed the government's decision to stop providing pensions to political victims of post-independence under the freedom fighters' system, but it also mandates that the State compensate these individuals with ₹5 lakh

The pension plan intended for 'freedom warriors' was discontinued for dependents or legal heirs of the 'political sufferers' of the post-independence period, and the decision was supported by the Calcutta High Court on Wednesday [State of West Bengal vs Kalipada Mondal].

The State contended that only those freedom fighters who fought against the British and gave their lives in defense of the nation prior to independence were eligible to receive pensions for themselves and their dependents under the scheme, and a division bench of Justices Indra Prasanna Mukerji and Biswaroop Chowdhury agreed.

"It was the government's grave responsibility to give these worthy individuals a way of life, as many of them were growing older and less financially stable. The bench noted that the administration had acted improperly in changing the plan and designating as eligible those who had participated in political movements after the nation attained independence but had no part in the freedom war.

Nonetheless, the bench upheld the government's decision while directing the Chief Secretary to appoint an Additional Chief Secretary of the State to lead a group of three high officials in determining what kind of reasonable compensation should be given to these individuals in order to end their pension policy.

"We direct that a sum of ₹5 lakh be paid as ad hoc compensation to each of such persons within two months of communication of this order," the court stated.

The Court stated that although the freedom fighters fought the British, these individuals—political sufferers—who were given political favors had led rallies against the post-independence administrations in order to advance their social or political agendas.

As a result, it was impossible to compare these people to the freedom fighters because they were in different circumstances. Their incorporation contradicted the original intent of the scheme's creation. It was wrong for the government to include them. The bench stated that this gave the government the right to right the wrong and reform the plan.

The Court emphasized that by excluding these individuals, the government was only fulfilling its duties under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which requires it to create a logical classification of those eligible for pensions awarded to freedom fighters by excluding individuals who did not participate in the freedom struggle from that classification.

The bench observed that these political victims and their family had long been collecting pensions under the relevant plan.

"But when a scheme or an action of the government is completely flawed in its conception and application founded on a mistaken notion or on erroneous or extraneous considerations or is against the concept of equal treatment of equals, then the policy or whatever benefit that flows from that particular policy or scheme cannot be a source of legitimate expectation for any person or group of persons," the Supreme Court stated.

The bench went on to say that it was indisputable that the government would not continue its policies in violation of the Constitution.

The Court stated that even while the political victims had no right to demand a pension, there was a "human side" to the situation.

It further stated that given its obligation to advance social and economic justice, the government can not refuse to recognize such an expectation in light of the Directive Principles of State Policy.

As the dependent heirs of political victims, these pension recipients are economically devoid and socially regressive. They were barely making ends meet with this pension they received. Their lives have undoubtedly suffered as a result of being denied this pension after thirty years. It has caused unexpected and severe hardship," the bench said.

The ruling written by Justice Mukerji further stated,

"Even if the political sufferers post-independence cannot be placed in the same bracket as freedom fighters, it cannot be ignored that in substantial cases the persons who had taken part in political or social movement post-independence had done it honestly and in good faith with the intention of promoting the goals, aims and objectives of the freedom fighters."

The bench stated that the cause of social and economic fairness needs to be acknowledged in light of Articles 38 and 51A of the Indian Constitution.

"All citizens must work toward advancing the objectives established by the freedom warriors. Given these humanitarian facts, we believe that the government should consider these people, who are the dependent heirs of political sufferers after freedom, by providing them with some form of compensation instead of ending the practice of awarding them a monthly pension, when enforcing its decision to pay pension to the dependent heirs of freedom fighters only under the subject scheme," the Court stated.