Professional Documents
Culture Documents
of
One Man Commission
Justice A.B.Palkar
(Former Judge, Bombay High Court)
Appointed
By
Government of Maharashtra
(VOLUME III-B)
2007
- 719 -
INDEX
Part Subject Page No
VOLUME I
I. INTRODUCTION 2-3
II. BRIEF HISTORY 4-7
III. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE COMMISSION 8-13
IV. GOA LIBERATION MOVEMENT 14-15
V. CASES IN WHICH CLAIM IS BASED EITHER ON 16-31
CONVICTION OR OTHERWISE DETENTION IN
CUSTODY FOR SOME PERIOD BY THE
RESPONDENT
VI. CASES RECOMMENDED BY ZILLA GAURAV 32-40
SAMMITI OR CASES IN WHICH THE CLAIM IS
SANCTIONED BY THE HIGH POWER
COMMITTEE PRIOR TO ISSUE OF
GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION DATED 4.7.1995
VII. GENERAL REASONS IN CASES OF 41-54
UNDERGROUND FREEDOM FIGHTERS
VIII. GENERAL REASONS IN CASES BASED ON 55-71
WARRANTS OF ARREST
IX. CASES IN WHICH CLAIM IS BASED ON 72-140
ARREST WARRANTS AND ALSO ON THE
GROUND THAT THE PERSON WAS WORKING
UNDERGROUND IN HYDERABAD FREEDOM
MOVEMENT
X. CASES IN WHICH DATE OF BIRTH IS 141-215
DISPUTED
VOLUME II
XI. CASES IN WHICH FILES WERE NOT MADE 217
AVAILABLE TO THE COMMISSION
XII. CASES IN WHICH THE CLAIMANT AS WELL AS 218
HIS OR HER SPOUCE IS REPORTED DEAD AND
HENCE CLOSED BY THE COMMISSION
XIII. PARTICULAR CASES OF UNDERGROUND 219-487
FREEDOM FIGHTERS
VOLUME III-A & B
XIV. PARTICULAR CASES OF FREEDOM FIGHTERS 489-838
CLAIM BASED ON ARREST WARRANT
XV. CONCLUDING REMARKS OF THE 839-848
COMMISSION
XVI. ANNEXURES (KEPT SEPARATELY) 849-862
XVII. LIST OF ALL 355 CASES (354, 354A) 863-872
- 720 -
The warrant was got verified by the Collector from the Police
Superintendent Beed. The Police Superintendent sent report on getting the
same verified from Police Station Ambajogai. Police Inspector Ambajogai
reported on 3.11.1997 that on inquiry the names of some persons were noticed
in the copy of warrant in file No. 7/1357 F Outward No. 407 dated 2 Behman
1357 F which included Dada Valda i.e. S/o Babu Maratha which is similar to
the name of the present applicant. In those days in Marathwada region
normally surname was not stated and instead caste used to be stated.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 16.12.1997 considered his
case and teferred to the fact that in absence of original record the copy cannot
be relied upon but the Committee is convinced that he had worked in the
freedom movement and recommended his case. The Additional Collector and
Member Secretary recorded that he does not agree and one of the Member
P.V.Joshi also recorded that the Urdu warrant is not verified.
and Zilla Gaurav Samiti has recommended his case for grant of pension and
pension was sanctioned on 4/18 -10.1999. The Under Secretary mentioned in
his note that the warrant is not verified.
Thus both the warrants not being reliable he is not entitled to the
Sanmanpatra and allied benefits which deserve to be and should be cancelled
forthwith and the Commission recommends accordingly.
- 723 -
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 10.12.1997 observed that
with reference to warrant in file No. 7/1/1357 F outward No. 407 dated 2
Behman 1357 F that original record is not with the Police Station and the copy
cannot be relied upon, however, Committee is satisfied that he had worked in
freedom movement and recommended his case.
The Member Secretary and Additional Collector did not agree and one
of the Member P.V.Joshi also recorded that warrant is not verified.
Before the Commission has filed zerox copy of warrant in file No.7
outward No.407 dated 2 Behman 1357 F issued by Ambajogai Police Station
and also filed affidavit in which more or less he has stated the same fact in
short.
Thus both the warrants not being reliable he is not entitled to the
Sanmanpatra and allied benefits which deserve to be and should be cancelled
forthwith and the Commission recommends accordingly.
- 725 -
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting held on 29.06.1999 stated that
Urdu warrant copy cannot believe in the absence of original record which was
not available. However, the Zilla Gaurav Samiti is convinced about his
participation in freedom movement and recommended his case to which one
of the member P.V.Joshi recorded objection on the ground that the copy of
warrant is not verified and only copy is produced.
He appeared before the Mane Committee and stated that warrant was
issued against him. He also stated that Dnyonoba Patil Rakh prepared his
application and obtained his thumb mark. He does not know what other
documents were produced.
The original warrant bearing file No. --- Outward No. 205 dated 24
Isfander 1357 Fasli (24.1.1948) is in the warrants received from the Judicial
Magistrate First Class Court, Georai. The signature on this warrant is only like
initial and is entirely different from the signature found on undisputed
correspondence/office notes signed by the same person i.e. Tahsildar Patoda
and also is not at all tallying with the signature on warrants in the file of
police station Ambajogai, Patoda Tahsil and even other warrants received
from Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Georai.
The Collector, Beed sent the Xerox copy of warrant enclosing list of
60 persons with specific query for verification to the Police Inspector,
Ambajogai.
He appeared before the Mane Committee and stated that he was aged
20 years and stayed at Kharda camp for six months and used to distribute
bhakari (bread) and he has not done any other work. No warrant was issued
against him. He does not know who has prepared his application for pension
but he has put his thumb mark. He is not aware of what documents are filed.
He filed copy of warrant and he stated that he would produce certified copy.
- 730 -
The warrant was sent for verification to the Police Station Ambajogai
by Collector Beed enclosing a copy of warrant and list of 60 persons on
26.8.1997 and Police Inspector, reported on 3.10.1997 that the original record
is available with the police station but the copy does not appear however
issued on payment of fees and it contains similar 27 names including Shankar
Kisan Maratha as compared to the list of 60 persons.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting held on 29.06.1999 stated that
Urdu warrant copy couldn’t be believed in the absence of original record,
which was not available. The Zilla Gaurav Samiti referred to the verification
report and observed that warrant cannot be relied but Samiti is convinced
about his participation in freedom movement and recommended his case. One
of the member P.V.Joshi endorsed that the copy of warrant is not verified.
Before the Mane Committee Lakhapatibai appeared and she stated that
she is not aware of any activities of her husband regarding freedom
movement.
- 732 -
does not agree with the recommendation and one of the member P.V.Joshi
also stated that there is no verification y of warrant.
Before the High Power Committee note was put up mentioning that in
the verification report the name of the person is appearing in the copy of
warrant and Zilla Gaurav Samiti has recommended. However, the Under
Secretary recorded that as observed by the Deputy Collector the copy is no
trustworthy and it is necessary to get satisfied about the truthfulness of the
copy. Thereafter further note was put up that the name appeared in the
warrant and Zilla Gaurav Samiti has recommended. The Member Secretary
Advocate Rajabhau Zarkar made a detailed note that the original record is not
available as stated by the District Collector and Police Inspector has stated that
original record is not available in the Police Station and the copy is not issued
on payment of fees and Zilla Gaurav Samiti is not satisfied regarding
truthfulness of the warrant copy and one member has clearly mentioned that
the warrant copy is not verified. In the Beed district similar cases in respect of
4-5 warrants are pending before the Government and in respect of all these
warrants it is necessary to get report from the Collector, Beed and unless a
detailed report is sent by the Collector in these matters, these matters be kept
pending.
Thereafter Deputy Secretary Mr. Nalawade made note that the warrant
is issued by Beed Police Station and not by Tahasildar Patoda and the original
record is available with the Police Station and warrant is in respect of
activities against Nizam Government. The other contents of the letter of the
Additional Collector is in typed proforma and similar in all cases but since the
Zilla Gaurav Samiti has recommended, recommendation be accepted and after
which the Member Secretary Advocate Zarkar who had made a detailed note
in respect of 4 to 5 warrants of Beed district mentioning that a detailed report
- 735 -
As the person was no more when the Mane Committee issued notice
his wife appeared before the Mane Committee and stated that she has no
personal knowledge.
It does not tally even with other warrants received from Ambajogai
Police Station. This is apparent to the naked eye and is confirmed by the
expert opinion.
The original warrant in file No. 21/57 F Outward No. 227 dated 17
Behman 1357 Fasli, copy whereof is relied upon in this case, is not made
available for verification from any source despite notice to all concerned.
When 29 original warrants made available from three different sources are
found to be forged one how a simple copy original whereof is not in existence
can be believed to be a genuine document.
He filed affidavit dated 16.1.1991 stating that arrest warrant was issued
against him in the freedom movement of Hyderabad.
The warrant was sent for verification by the District Collector Beed to
the Civil Judge, Gevrai and the Civil Judge Gevrai reported on 2.11.1997 that
original record is not available but the copy sent to him appears to have been
issued to one Advocate V.T.Chavan from the Court along with his report he
enclosed a list of 75 persons stating that these names are there in the warrant
and the name of Devrao Kisanrao Lad is at Sr.No. 169.
been issued by the Tahasildar but the original record is not available in the
Court and verification report be called from the Tahasidar Patoda.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting held on dated Nil referred to the
Urdu copy of warrant and its Marathi translation and stated that in the absence
of original record copies cannot be believed but papers pertain to the act
against Nizam Government and Zilla Gaurav Samiti is convinced that he had
worked in the freedom movement and recommended sanction.
The original warrant bearing file No. --- Outward No. 205 dated 24
Isfander 1357 Fasli (24.1.1948) is in the warrants received from the Judicial
Magistrate First Class Court, Georai. The signature on this warrant is only like
initial and is entirely different from the signature found on undisputed
- 738 -
She applied for grant of pension on 28.01.1991 claiming that she took
part in the freedom movement and she used to cook food for the persons in the
Camp and also convey secret messages to them. In her affidavit dated
24.01,1991 she stated that arrest warrant was issued against her in file No.
205/1357 Fasli. She produced Xerox copy of warrant in file No. 205/1357
Fasli along with Marathi translation and mentioned in the Marathi Translation
Outward No. 209 dated 24 Isfinder 1357 Fasli equivalent to 24th January
1948.The copy of warrant produced is itself a copy of copy signed by Special
Executive Magistrate which in turn is a copy of true copy issued by Assistant
Superintendent, Civil Court, Gevrai on 20.9.2990 and from the endorsement
which appears in the Xerox copy it is seen that there is endorsement dated
24.9.1990 “verified that this Xerox copy is true copy of original copy issued
by the Gevrai Court on 20.09.1990”.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 29.1.1999 stated that the
original record of the warrant was not available but the name appears in the
copy of warrant. No positive recommendation was given.
The High Power Committee stated that the basis of the same warrant
there is verification report in another file of which Xerox copy is retained in
this file and sanctioned pension.
- 740 -
She appeared before Mane Committee and stated that she was
providing bhakari (bread) to the freedom fighters.
In the affidavit filed before the Commission she stated that she use to
supply bhakari on the instructions of her husband.
The original warrant bearing file No. --- Outward No. 205 dated 24
Isfander 1357 Fasli (24.1.1948) is in the warrants received from the Judicial
Magistrate First Class Court, Georai. The signature on this warrant is only like
initial and is entirely different from the signature found on undisputed
correspondence/office notes signed by the same person i.e. Tahsildar Patoda
and also is not at all tallying with the signature on warrants in the file of
police station Ambajogai, Patoda Tahsil and even other warrants received
from Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Georai.
The warrant was sent for verification by the District Collector, Beed to
Tahasildar on 3.9.1997 enclosing copy of warrant and list of 21 persons to
which the Tahasildar replied on 15.11.1997 stating that the name of Limbaji
Abaji Bangar in the warrant. He has however stated that original record is not
available and verification is obviously done from the copy itself.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti considered his case in the meeting dated
29.1.1999 and recommended his case on the basis of warrant stating that his
name appears in the copy and therefore he has taken part in the freedom
movement. One of the member P.V.Joshi stated that he does no agree with the
recommendation .
The report dated 15.1.1997 of Tahsildar Patoda to the effect that the
copy of warrarnt contains more names than 21 names given in the list further
strengthen doubt about genuiness of the warrant.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 16.12.1997 referred to the
copy of warrant and the fact that the original record is in the police station but
the copy is not obtained on payment of fees, the name of the persons in the
copy, which has not been issued by the police station on payment of fees and
copy cannot be relied upon but the Zilla Gaurav Samiti is convinced about his
work in the freedom movement. The Member Secretary and Additional
Collector noted that he does not agree and one member P.V.Joshi also pointed
out that there is no verification of warrant and made a dissenting note
accordingly.
It appears that Narayan Abaji filed petition No. 4755/95 in the High
Court and notice had been issued to him for filing further evidence in view of
Government Resolution dated 4.7.1995.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 24.4.1998 did not
recommend his case as it was not satisfied with the copy of warrant.
Tahasildar, Patoda and it also is not at all tallying with the signature on
warrants in the file of police station Ambejogai the warrants contained in file
of Tahasildar Patoda and other warrants received from the Judicial Magistrate
First Class Court, Georai.
This apparent to the naked eye and is confirmed by the expert opinion.
The general observations made in separate part of this report on warrant cases
apply Mutatis Mutandis to this case.
Thus the warrant not being reliable he is not entitled and has failed to
prove his entitlement to the Sanmanpatra and allied benefits which deserve to
be and should be cancelled forthwith and the Commission recommends
accordingly.
- 747 -
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 9.3.1999 referred to the
arrest warrant issued against him and to the fact that the original record is
submitted to the Collector office by the Tahasildar and the copy has been
issued by the Tahasil Office and the original record is available, recommended
the grant of pension.
The High Power Committee referred to the warrant and the note
recommended sanction. However, thereafter the Member Secretary asked
office to re-examine the matter.
Further note was put up regarding the warrant, its verification and the
fact that name was in the warrant (copy) and recommendation of the Zilla
Gaurav Samiti and pension was sanctioned.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 9.3.1999 referred to the
fact that the original record is not available and the names of the persons
mentioned in the list are not in the warrant and the Xerox copy cannot be
verified. Thereafter in the endorsement that the Zilla Gaurav Samiti does not
recommend word “Not” nahi is scored out and it is stated by the Chairman in
his own handwriting “verification is proper warrant is in connection with the
freedom movement and case is fit for sanction.”
101/1357 Outward No. 190 dated 14 Behman 1357 Fasli (14.12.1947). The
alleged original warrant is in the file received from the Collector Beed
pertaining to Patoda Tahsil. The signatures on this warrant is entirely different
from the signature found on the undisputed correspondence/office notes
signed by the same person i.e. Tahasildar, Patoda and it also not at all tallying
with the signature on warrants in the file of police station Ambajogai, Judicial
Magistrate First Class Court Georai and even on other warrants contained in
file of Tahasildar Patoda. This is apparent to the naked eye and is confirmed
by expert opinion. The general observation made in separate part of this report
on warrant cases apply Matatis Mutandis to this case.
The copy was sent for verification from Collector Beed to Police
Station Ambejogai on 26.7.1997 enclosing copy of warrant and list of 60
persons making specific queries. The Police Inspector reported on 3.10.1997
that original record is available at the police station and out of list supplied to
him 27 similar names appeared in the warrant which includes the name of
Baba Ashruba.
The District Collector Beed had called for verification report from the
Police Superintendent Beed and Police Superintendent by his letter dated
3.11.1997 reported that the warrant was verified though Ambejogai Police
Station and on getting the same from person knowing Urdu the names of 27
persons were noticed which include the name of Namdev S/o Mahadev which
is similar to the name of the person claiming pension. In this report reference
is made to warrant in file No. 7/1 1357 Fasli Outward No. 407 and it is
mentioned that original record is not available and from copy it does not
appear to have been issued on payment of fees. This reference is obviously to
the copy from which the Xerox copy has been prepared. It is further stated
that it is not known whether the person who applied for pension is the same
person as mentioned in the warrant as there is difference in the name and the
name mentioned as Namdev S/o Mahadev Dhed.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 16.12.1997 referred to the
report of the Police Station Ambejogai and mentioned that the warrant copy
cannot be believed in the absence of original record and no proof of copy
having been obtained on payment of fees, however Zilla Gaurav samiti is
convinced about his participation in the freedom movement. The Member
Secretary and additional Collector did not agree with the remarks of the Zilla
Gaurav Samiti and one of the member P.V. Joshi stated that warrant is not
verified.
Court Georai and warrant contained in file of Tahsildar Patoda and other
warrants received from Ambajogai Police Station. The alleged original
warrant dated 14 Isfander 1357 F is in the file received from collector Beed
pertaining to Patoda Tahsil and signature thereon is entirely different from the
signatures found on undisputed correrspondence/office notes signed by the
same person i.e. Tahsildar Patoda and it is not at all tallying with signature on
warrants received from the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Georai,
Ambajogai Police Station and other warrants in the file of Tahsildar Patoda.
He had filed Writ Petition No. 4491/95 along with some other persons
( File No. 246 and 268). In the writ petition there was direction to decide his
claim within 9 months.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 14.2.1997 referred to the
fact that the original record is not available. The copy cannot be relied upon
and did not give any positive recommendation.
In the further note it is stated that the warrant was sent for verification
and Tahasildar reported to he Collector that the warrant was issued from his
office and the copy is issued on payment of fees. But the same could not be
verified in the absence of original record. The Collector has also informed
that the warrant cannot be verified in the absence of original record, therefore
the decision of the Zilla Gaurav Samiti does not appear to be correct and the
request for grant of pension made by Mahadev s/o Aabaji, Kacharu s/o Kisan
Bhandare and Mahadev s/o Yashvant Aadaale be granted. Thereafter desk
Officer endorsed for rejection of claim.
- 758 -
He appeared before Mane Committee and stated that warrant was not
issued against him and he has produced affidavits of two freedom fighters in
support of his claim.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 16.12.1997 referred to the
above facts and stated that the warrant copy cannot be relied upon as the
original record is not available. However, Samiti is convinced about his
participation in the freedom movement and recommended his case.
The Member Secretary, however made a note that he does not agree
and one of the member P.V.Joshi stated that warrant is not properly verified.
The High Power Committee however referred to the fact that original
warrant is available at Police Station and it is in connection with the
Hyderabad Freedom Movement and accepted the recommendation.
- 761 -
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 20.2.1997 considered the
evidence of four affidavits and copy of warrant in filed No. 21 1357 Fasli and
the verification report of the Tahasildar and recommended that the copy be
verified from the Tehasildar office by sending in hand written Urdu copy.
Thereafter again note was put up before the High Power Committee
that he has filed affidavits of freedom fighters in support of his claim, warrant
of arrest was issued against him and in the warrant name of Manohar Gena
Bhayal is included. Thereafter the Member Secretary endorsement that the
application be granted and ultimately the same was granted on 28.9.1999.
- 764 -
The warrant copy was sent for verification to the Police Inspector by
the Collector enclosing the list of 60 persons and made specific query in the
letter contained. The Inspector reported on 3.10.1997 that the original is
available at the police station but the copy has not been issued on payment of
fees and there are 27 similar names in the list sent by Collector including the
name of Ashruba Vithoda which is similar to the name of the claimant.
The warrant was sent for verification by the Collector, Beed to Civil
Judge Gevrai, who in reply on 2.11.1997 stated that original record was
available and copy was issued to one V.T.Chavan Advocate and name of
Dyandev Raoji Rakh is at Sr. No. 78.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 29.6.1999 observed that
the warrant copy is not reliable in the absence of original record yet the Samiti
is convinced that he has taken part in the freedom movement so
recommended.
The original warrant bearing file No. --- Outward No. 205 dated 24
Isfander 1357 Fasli (24.1.1948) is in the warrants received from the Judicial
Magistrate First Class Court, Georai. The signature on this warrant is only like
initial and is entirely different from the signature found on undisputed
correspondence/office notes signed by the same person i.e. Tahsildar Patoda
and also is not at all tallying with the signature on warrants in the file of
police station Ambajogai, Patoda Tahsil and even other warrants received
from Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Georai.
The warrant was sent for verification by the Collector to the Tahasidar
and Tahasidar replied on 24.12.1997 that along with warrant only two names
have been referred and out of them names of Vishwanath Bhagwant and
Bavane were included therein and in addition there are other names, however,
he has not stated name of Manik Devrao Rakh appearing in the warrant.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting held on 9.3.1999 referred to the
fact that name of the applicant is not in the warrant and original record is not
available. It is further stated that the copy has not been received from the
office of Tahasildar and original record is not available. The word not (Nahi)
deleted/scored out, and added is (ahe) yes, however, the sentence that there is
no recommendation is one which logically followed, the earlier contents.
By the time notice was issued by the Mane Committee Manik Rakh
had expired and his wife appeared before the Committee as usual she has no
personal knowledge and the affidavit filed before the Commission is also not
on personal knowledge.
- 770 -
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 23.12.1997 referred to the
warrant copy and the fact that original record is not available but stated further
that his name is in the warrant (copy). The copy cannot be relied upon in the
absence of original record but the Zilla Gaurav Samiti is convinced about his
taking part in the freedom movement and recommended his case for sanction.
The Additional Collector and Member Secretary disagreed with the
recommendation.
The High Power Committee, however, referred to the fact that the copy
is signed by the Executive Magistrate and name appears in the copy. The
Member Secretary has made a note that the District Collector has informed
that the number of warrants with Tahasildar but the same is not available. The
name of the person appears in the warrant and it is connected with the freedom
movement and moreover the Zilla Gaurav Samiti has recommended and
thereafter pension was sanctioned.
All the 29 warrants received are found to be forged and not genuine by
the Commission as discussed in separate part of this report on warrant cases
for the reasons given there under.
In his further affidavit dated 26.2.1999 he stated for the first time that
he was required to live away from his house for 9 to 10 months.
The Zilla Gaurav samiti in its meeting dated 9.3.1999 referred to the
fact that the name is appeared in the warrant copy and the original record is
submitted to the Collector. The copy cannot be relied on the absence of
original record. However, the Zilla Gaurav Samiti is convinced about his
taking part in the freedom movement and recommended his case.
The Additional Collector, wrote to the Section Officer dated nil that
there is no compliance of Government Resolution dated 4.7.1995.
- 774 -
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 29.9..1998 referred to the
report of Civil Judge and Tahasildar Patoda and stated that warrant copy
cannot be relied upon and no positive recommendation can be given.
Before the High Power Committee a note was put up that he has
produced copy of warrant on the basis of same warrant 19 persons from
Osmanabad district had been granted pension. The District Collector, Beed
had informed that original file is not available and therefore Zilla Gaurav
Samiti has not recommended the case. However, the warrant is issued from
the Tahasil office and therefore in the Court matter it is necessary to seek
further time.
- 776 -
This apparent to the naked eye and is confirmed by the expert opinion.
The general observations made in separate part of this report on warrant cases
apply Mutatis Mutandis to this case.
The warrant copy was sent by the Collector, Beed to Police Inspector
Ambejogai as Xerox copy showed that the copy was issued from the police
station. The letter was accompanied by copy of warrant and list of 144 persons
and in reply dated 3.10.1997 Police Inspector stated that original was available
at Police Station and the name of Sona Ranga Dhade was in the copy.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 16.12.1997 referred to the
copy of warrant, as original is not available, copy cannot be relied upon, but
the Samiti is convinced that he had taken part in the freedom movement and
recommended his case. The Member Secretary and Additional Collector
differed with the recommendation and one of the member P.V.Joshi observed
that warrant was not verified.
Before the Commission also he produced true copy of the said warrant
and filed affidavit making some further improvement in the original affidavit.
bearing file No. 21/57 Outward No. 217 dated 17 Behman 1357 Fasli copy
where of is produced and relied upon in this case is not amongst those 29
warrants. When all 29 warrants received are found to be not genuine by the
Commission as discussed in separate part of this report on warrant cases for
reasons given there under how can copy of a warrant, original whereof is not
in existence can be believed to be genuine and true. The report dated
3.10.1997 of Ambajogai Police Station addressed to the Collector Beed to the
effect that out of 47 names given in the list names of only 19 persons are in the
copy of warrant sent to him and other 28 persons are not there in the copy of
warrant further strengthen doubt about genuineness of the warrant.
Thus both the warrants not being reliable he is not entitled to the
Sanmanpatra and allied benefits which deserve to be and should be cancelled
forthwith and the Commission recommends accordingly.
- 779 -
Maruti s/o Dada Wanve applied for pension on 5.7.1990 on the basis of
arrest warrant issued against him in file No. 21/2 1357 Fasli Outward No.214
dated nil and relied on the Xerox copy of warrant.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 16.12.1997 referred to the
warrant copy and similar name appeared in the warrant and report of Police
Inspector Ambejogai and further stated that copy is not reliable but the samiti
is convinced about his taking part in the freedom movement. The Additional
Collector and Member Secretary differed with the recommendation and one of
the member P.V.Joshi did not agree with the recommendation.
He appeared before Mane committee and stated that he does not know
Sona Rama Jaybhay and Nivruti Fakira Dhakane. He does not know what
documents are produced as one Jagdale prepared his application, took his
thumb impression. For about 13 months he was required to live away from his
house. He stated that he will produce certified copy within eight days which
has not been produced.
- 780 -
He had filed Writ Petition No. 4491/95 along with some other persons
( File No. 271 and 339). In the writ petition there was direction to decide his
claim within 9 months.
In the further note it is stated that the warrant was sent for verification
and Tahasildar reported to he Collector that the warrant was issued from his
office and the copy is issued on payment of fees. But the same could not be
verified in the absence of original record. The Collector has informed that the
warrant cannot be verified in the absence of original record, therefore the
decision of the Zilla Gaurav Samiti does not appear to b correct and the
request for grant of pension made by Mahadev Aabaji Kacharu, Kisan
Bhandare and Mahadev Yashvant Aadagle can not be granted. There after
Desk Officer endorsed for rejection of claim.
- 783 -
He appeared before Mane Committee and stated that warrant was not
issued against him and he has produced affidavits of two freedom fighters in
support of his claim.
All the 29 warrants received are formed to be forged and not genuine
by the Commission as discussed in separate part of this report on warrant
cases for the reasons given there under.
He produced Xerox copy in file No. CCM 205/1357 Fasli Outward No.
209 dated 24 Isfandar 1357 Fasli i.e. 24th Janualry 1948.
The Additional Collector, Beed, sent the Xerox copy for verification to
the Civil Court Gevrai and there are two letters of same Civil Judge
S.N.Shelke one dated 10.8.1998 and other dated 2.11.1997. In the letter dated
10.8.1998 it is stated that original record is not available and that too with
reference to arrest warrant Nos. 201 to 205 and 617 of 1357 fasli and in letter
dated 2.11.1997 it is stated that original warrant Outward No.205/1357 Fasli is
available in the Court and the copy produced was issued to V.T.Chavan
Advocate from the Court.
The Collector sent list of names to the civil Judge and the names which
are similar have been pointed out in the list attached to the report by the Civil
Judge in which the name appears of Shahu Anna Banjara and not as Shahurao
Abaji Rakh.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti considered his case in meeting held on (dated
nil) and observed that in the absence of original record copy of warrant cannot
- 786 -
be relied, however, the Zilla Gaurav Samiti is convinced about the part taken
in freedom movement by Shahurao Abaji and recommended his case.
The original warrant bearing file No. --- Outward No. 205 dated 24
Isfander 1357 Fasli (24.1.1948) is in the warrants received from the Judicial
Magistrate First Class Court, Georai. The signature on this warrant is only like
initial and is entirely different from the signature found on undisputed
correspondence/office notes signed by the same person i.e. Tahsildar Patoda
and also is not at all tallying with the signature on warrants in the file of
police station Ambajogai, Patoda Tahsil and even other warrants received
from Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Georai.
The warrant was sent for verification by the Collector, Beed to Police
Station Ambejogai on 26.7.1997 enclosing a copy of warrant and list of 60
persons making a specific query. In reply dated 3.10.1997 Police Inspector,
Ambajogai stated that original record is available at the police station but the
copy is not obtained on payment of fees but similar name appears in the copy
as Nanahari Maratha of Mahajanwadi.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 16.12.1997 referred to the
copy of warrant and the similar name appearing therein and stated that the
copy is not issued on payment of fees and cannot be believed, yet, Zilla
Gaurav Samiti is convinced about his taking part in the freedom movement
and recommended grant of pension. The Additional Collector and Member
secretary however recorded that he does not agree with the recommendation
and one of the member P.v.Joshi remarked warrant is not duly verified.
Before the Commission he has filed affidavit stating more or less the
same facts.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 16.12.1997 referred to the
copy of warrant and stated that the copy cannot be relied upon, however, the
Zilla Gaurav Samiti is convinced that he had taken part in the freedom
movement. However, Member Secretary and Additional Collector differed
and recorded accordingly and one Member P.V.Joshi remarked that warrant is
not verified properly.
The High Power Committee, granted the claim on the basis that similar
name is found in the copy of warrant as Police Inspector, Ambajogai, verified
it and Zilla Gaurav Samiti recommends his case.
does not know in which village this was done. He was taken to police station
for one night and on the next day he apologized and he was released. The
police did not arrest him. No warrant was issued against him. He agreed to
produce certified copy of the warrant but did not produce.
The Collector vide his report dated 15.7.1998 reported that there was
no compliance of Government Resolution dated 4.7.1995 & it was not fit case
for grant of pension however further added to take final decision at
Government level.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 29.1.1999 did not
recommend the application of Ramkishan Nagargoje as there was no
compliance of the Government Resolution dated 4.7.1995.
original warrant is in the file received from the Gevrai Court. The signatures
on this warrant is only like initial and is entirely different from the signature
found on the undisputed correspondence/office notes signed by the same
person i.e. Tahasildar, Patoda and also is not at all talling with the signature
on warrants in the file of police station Ambajogai the warrants contained in
file of Tahasildar Patoda and even on other warrants received from Judicial
Magistrate First Class Court, Georai. This is apparent to the naked eye and is
confirmed by the expert opinion. The general observations made in separate
part of this report on warrant cases apply Mutatis Mutandis to this case. Thus
the warrant not being reliable he is not entitled to the Sanmanpatra and allied
benefits which deserve to be and should be cancelled forthwith and the
Commission recommends accordingly.
- 796 -
The papers in the file reveal that the Collector, Beed vide his letter
dated 26.8.1997 asked the Ambajogai police station to verify whether the
name of Rama Wanwe was in the warrant. The Ambajogai police in its report
dated 3.10.1997 replied that original warrant is available with the police
station and name of Rama Waman is there in that warrant.
The Additional Collector, Beed in his report dated 15.7.1998 did not
recommend the application on the ground that there was no compliance of
Government Resolution dated 4.7.1995.
The paper in file reveal that the Collector, Beed vide his letter dated
26.08.1997 forwarded list of 44 persons to the Ambajogai Police Station for
verification and Ambajogai Police Station vide its letter dt. 03.10.1997
reported that the name of Laxman Ganpati is at Sr.No.17 in the Warrant.
In the affidavit filed before the Commission he has stated for the first
time that for 13, months he was required to live away from his house and has
referred to the copy of warrant in file No. 21/2 O.No. 227 dated 17 Behman
1357 F.
The case depends on the reliability of warrants in file No. No. 21/57 F
Outward No. 217 dated 17 Bahman 1357 F (17.12.47).
Papers in the file reveal that on 26.08.1997 Collector, Beed sent a letter
to Ambajogai Police Station for verification of genuineness and correctness of
the warrant. In reply to the said warrant Ambajogai Police Station replied on
03.10.1997 in affirmative stating that name of applicant is at Sr. No.11.
received from the Ambejogai Police Station. The signature on this warrant is
entirely different from the signatures found on the undisputed
correspondence/office notes signed by the same person i.e. Tahasildar of
Patoda and it also is not at all tallying with signature on the warrants received
from the Judicial Magistrate First Class Court Georai, warrant contained in file
of Tahsildar Patoda and other warrants received from Ambajogai Police
Station.
The papers on record reveal that the Collector, Beed vide letter dated
16.12.1997 asked Civil Judge, Gevrai about the genuineness and correctness
of the copy of warrant placed on record to which Civil Judge Gevrai vide his
reply dated 10.8.1998 replied that the original warrant is not available.
Thereafter in the meeting dated 29.09.1998 Zilla Gaurav Samiti did not
recommend application of the applicant, as there was no verification of copy
of warrant produced on record. The Additional Collector, Beed in his report
dated 7.11.1998 reported that there was no compliance of Government
Resolution dated 4.7.1995, so it was not a fit case for grant of pension.
Commission also. In the affidavit filed before the Commission he has stated
for the first time that for 13 months he was required to live away from his
house and his family suffered because of this.
This apparent to the naked eye and is confirmed by the expert opinion.
The general observations made in separate part of this report on warrant cases
apply Mutatis Mutandis to this case.
recollects and state all the activities done by him against Nizam Government.
However, he stated that a warrant was issued against him.
In the affidavit filed beforel the Commission he has stated for the first
time that he was required to live away from his house for 13 months.
It does not tally even with other warrants received from Ambajogai
Police Station. This is apparent to the naked eye and is confirmed by expert
opinion. The general observations made in the separate part on warrant cases
of this report apply Mutatis Mutandis to this case.
The High Power Committee vide its decision dated 26.06.1999 granted
the application of Sukhdeo Arsul relying on the recommendation of the Zilla
Gaurav Committee and verification of the warrant by the Collector, Beed
through Superintendent of Police, Beed.
- 811 -
It does not tally even with other warrants received from Ambajogai
Police Station. This is apparent to the naked eye and is confirmed by expert
opinion. The general observations made in the separate part on warrant cases
of this report apply Mutatis Mutandis to this case.
The record contains Xerox copy of letter dated 21.11.1997 sent to the
Collector ,Beed by Civil Judge Georai in reply to Collector's letter dt/-
26.081997 wherein the Civil Judge replied that Urdu warrant No. 205/1357
Fasli is a warrant whereon there is no file number , it bears date 24th Ispinder
1357 Fasli and original of the said warrant is available in his office an d copy
thereof had been issued against application No. 538 / 1990 of Mr. V. T.
Chavan Advocate and a list containing 175 names mentioned in the said
- 813 -
warrant is being appended with the letter. Xerox copy of the said list is not on
record of this file.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 30.07.1998 did not
recommend the case on the ground that in the verification report of Civil
Judge ,Georai he has stated that the warrant available with him does not bear
file number and outward number. However, the Zilla Gaurav Samiti left it to
the Government to take final decision in the matter.
The original warrant bearing file No. --- Outward No. 205 dated 24
Isfander 1357 Fasli (24.1.1948) is in the warrants received from the Judicial
Magistrate First Class Court, Georai. The signature on this warrant is only like
initial and is entirely different from the signature found on undisputed
- 814 -
It appears from the record that Writ Petition no. 3606 of 1996 was filed
by Sukhdeo Megha Phunde in the High Court, Bench at Aurangabad wherein
directions were given on 30.04.1998 to decide the application within a period
of three months.
The original warrant bearing file No. --- Outward No. 205 dated 24
Isfander 1357 Fasli (24.1.1948) is in the warrants received from the Judicial
Magistrate First Class Court, Georai. The signature on this warrant is only like
initial and is entirely different from the signature found on undisputed
correspondence/office notes signed by the same person i.e. Tahsildar Patoda
and also is not at all tallying with the signature on warrants in the file of
police station Ambajogai, Patoda Tahsil and even other warrants received
from Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Georai.
1357 Fasli (24.1.1948), copy whereof is produced and relied upon in this case
is not amongst those 29 warrants. When all 29 warrants received are found to
be forged and false by the Commission as discussed in separate part of this
report on warrant cases for reasons given there under how can copy of
warrant, original whereof is not in existence can be believed to be genuine and
true.
The report dated 6.10.1997 of Tahsildar Patoda to the effect that out of
112 names given in the list names similar to only 8 persons are and rest 104
are not in the copy of warrant sent to him for verification further strengthens
doubt about genuineness of the warrant.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 16.12.1997 resolved that
the Samiti was convinced about participation of Ramrao Bangar in the
Hyderabad struggle movement, though the original record of the warrant was
not available for verification. The Member Secretary endorsed his disapproval
with the opinion of the Committee. P.V.Joshi one of the member also
endorsed that there is no verification of the warrant.
The Additional Collector, Beed in his letter dated 15.7.1998 sent to the
Deputy Secretary, GAD endorsed that because the warrant is not verified from
the original and certified copy thereof is not placed on record. It is not a fit
case to grant pension, however, he left it to the discretion of the government
to take final decision in the matter.
submitted to the Collector, Beed on his querry for verification of the warrant
and recommendation of the Zilla Gaurav Samiti.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 24.04.1998 did not
recommend the application as it had doubt about genueiness and truthfulness
of the warrant copy whereof was relied upon by Krishnanath Mule in support
of his claim.
The original warrant bearing file No. --- Outward No. 205 dated 24
Isfander 1357 Fasli (24.1.1948) is in the warrants received from the Judicial
Magistrate First Class Court, Georai. The signature on this warrant is only like
initial and is entirely different from the signature found on undisputed
correspondence/office notes signed by the same person i.e. Tahsildar Patoda
and also is not at all tallying with the signature on warrants in the file of
police station Ambajogai, Patoda Tahsil and even other warrants received
from Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Georai.
He had filed Writ Petition No. 4491/95 along with some other persons
( File No. 246 and 268). In the writ petition there was direction to decide his
claim within 9 months.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 14.2.1997 referred to the
fact that the original Xerox record is not available. The copy cannot be relied
upon and did not give any positive recommendation.
In the further note it is stated that the warrant was sent for verification
and Tahasildar reported to the Collector that the warrant was issued from his
office and the copy is issued on payment of fees. But the same could not be
verified in the absence of original record. The Collector has informed that the
warrant cannot be verified in the absence of original record. Therefore the
decision of the Zilla Gaurav Samiti does not appear to be correct and the
request for grant of pension made by Mahadev s/o Aabaji, Kacharu s/o Kisan
Bhandare and Mahadev s/o Yashvant Aadaale may be granted. Thereafter
Desk Officer endorsed for rejection of claim.
- 825 -
He appeared before Mane Committee and stated that warrant was not
issued against him and he has produced affidavits of two freedom fighters in
support of his claim.
All the 29 warrants received are formed to be forged and not genuine
by the Commission as discussed in separate part of this report on warrant
cases for the reasons given thereunder.
He filed affidavit dated 5.1.1998 stating that arrest warrant was issued
against him and he was absconding.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 16.12.1997 stated that the
copy cannot be relied upon in the absence of original record but the copy
shows that it is in respect of freedom movement against Nizam and
recommended his case for grant of pension. The Member Secretary and
Additional Collector differed and one of the Member P.V.Joshi recorded his
objection stating that the warrant was not verified.
The Under Secretary however noted that the warrant is not verified.
- 828 -
He appeared before Mane Committee but did not refer to the warrant
issued against him by the Court or by the Police. He further stated that he has
produced Xerox copy of warrant issued against him.
Before the Commission he filed application for calling the record from
the Patoda Tahasildar in respect of warrant and also made reference of warrant
in his affidavit.
It does not tally even with other warrants received from Ambajogai
Police Station. This is apparent to the naked eye and is confirmed by expert
opinion. The general observations made in the separate part on warrant cases
of this report apply Mutatis Mutandis to this case.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 29.9.1998 referred to the
report of Ashti Court regarding verification and stated that name of Prabhakar
Sitaram Sonar appears in warrant and original record is not available. The
copy is not reliable and expressed inability to recommend his case.
The High Power Committee considered his case. And note put up to
the High Power Committee was to the effect that the copy of warrant produced
by him was considered in respect of persons in Osmanabad district. And in
- 830 -
that file the copy was signed by the District Collector and the name of the
person appeared in the said copy and santioned pension.
The Under Secretary, however, put up that the original record is not
available.
The original warrant bearing file No. --- Outward No. 205 dated 24
Isfander 1357 Fasli (24.1.1948) is in the warrants received from the Judicial
Magistrate First Class Court, Georai. The signature on this warrant is only like
initial and is entirely different from the signature found on undisputed
correspondence/office notes signed by the same person i.e. Tahsildar Patoda
and also is not at all tallying with the signature on warrants in the file of
police station Ambajogai, Patoda Tahsil and even other warrants received
from Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Georai.
The District Collector wrote letter to the Civil Judge, Gevrai with
reference to the different writ petitions including the writ petition of Bansilal
Bhaurao Bhutada. The Civil Judge, Gevrai wrote on 21.11.199 that the
original record of warrant Ourward No.617 is available in which there is name
of Bansilal Bhaurao Bhutada.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 8.10.1998 stated that as
per the report of Civil Judge, the original record is not available in the Court,
the copy is not reliable and the Zilla Gaurav Samiti is unable to recommend
his case.
This apparent to the naked eye and is confirmed by the expert opinion.
The general observations made in separate part of this report on warrant cases
apply Mutatis Mutandis to this case.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting dated 16.12.1997 referred to the
report of police superintendent stating that there is his name in the warrant and
relying on the copy of warrant stated that the warrant copy is issued in absence
of original record, however, the Zilla Gaurav Samiti is convinced that he has
taken part in freedom movement. The Member Secretary and Additional
Collector, however, noted that he does not agree and one of the Member
P.V.Joshi also observed that warrant is not properly verified.
Before the Mane Committee his wife appeared. She has no personal
knowledge for making statement.
Zilla Gaurav Samiti in its meeting Dt/- 16.12.1997 stated that the copy
could not be relied upon in view of the report and non-availibility of original
record, however, Zilla Gaurav Samiti is convinced about his participation in
freedom movement. The Member Secretary and Additional Collector recorded
that he does not agree with the recommendation and one member P.V. Joshi
also endorsed that there is no verification of warrant.
filed with application. He also does not know whether the warrant was issued
against him.
In the affidavit filed before the Commission he has stated that for 13
months he was required to live away from his house.
Thus both the warrants not being reliable he is not entitled to the
Sanmanpatra and allied benefits which deserve to be and should be cancelled
forthwith and the Commission recommends accordingly.
- 839 -
PART – XV
CONCLUDING REMARKS
OF
THE COMMISSION
Respondent freedom fighters (they are referred to as Respondents for the sake
of convenience as some of them were Respondents in the Public Interest
Litigation). The entitlements of the freedom fighters to the Sanmanpatra and
allied benefits viz. free traveling, pension, preference in service to dependants
etc. were required to be considered and decided by the Commission. This was
on the background of the fact that these benefits had already been granted by
the Government by examining their cases based on the recommendations of
the Zilla Gaurav Samiti. The matter was considered and forwarded to the High
Power Committee by the Zilla Gaurav Samiti. It was required to be
considered in accordance with the provisions of law including various
Government Resolutions issued from time to time. The most important
Government Resolution applicable to almost all cases with expectation which
are far and few between, was the one issued on 4th July 1995. The question
raised regarding its applicability to the pending cases was decided by the Full
Bench of the Bombay High Court in Tukaram Ramji V/s. State of
Maharashtra reported in 1993(3) Mah.L.J. 735. The full Bench laid down
the law by answering the three points raised as below:-
The Commission also noted the important legal aspects laid down by
the Apex Court as well as by the High Court in deciding the claims of freedom
fighters in various other cases.
The Commission also noted the law laid down by Supreme Court in
Mukund Lal Bhandari Vs. Union of India and ors. Reported in (1003)
Suppl. (3) SCC 2 and in Gurdial Singh Vs. Union of India (2001) 8 SCC 8.
Such affidavits were filed in support of cases which were far above the
said number. This aspect is already discussed in detail in the part of general
reasons of cases based on arrest warrants. A particular format of the affidavit
was kept ready. It was got typed and the name of the person claiming to be
freedom fighter was inserted mentioning his age, place of residence and these
additions and alterations were not even initialed by anybody. There was
already blank space left for such insertion and this practice was so rampant
- 843 -
that in some cases the blank spaces remained blank and the affidavits were
sworn with blank spaces and such affidavits were not only filed but were also
relied upon, and in some cases on realizing that the earlier affidavits were
blank, the affidavits of other freedom fighters mentioning totally different
incidents were filed in addition.
Not only that such formats were kept ready by the supporting freedom
fighters, even for the claimant freedom fighter a format was kept ready and
the name of the applicant (claimant), his age and place of residence was added
and the additions were not initialed or signed. The Commission also found
that in some affidavits certain portions were erased by use of whitener and in
some cases name earlier written (name of the claimant) was erased by
whitener and other name of claimant was written in that place and as stated
earlier without any initial or signature. The advocate who identified the
deponent before the authority did not bother to bring it to the notice of the
authority. Even the authority did not bother to go through or even to have a
look at the affidavit and raise query as to why the name was added in different
ink or at different time and why the place for addition of name was blank.
It is obvious that the said authority was just signing the stamp paper
produced before it and never bothered even to inquire with the person as to
who he was and what statement is contained in the affidavit.
There is one classic case of person named Mukta Bapu Dhas who
claimed pension as a freedom fighter. The affidavit was drafted as if Mukta
was a woman because normally Mukta is name of woman and even the
supporting freedom fighters in their affidavits referred to Mukta as a woman.
These are some cases for example in case of Dwarkabai case file No. 84 and
Mahadev Kisan Mankale Case file No. 103 etc. in which similar interesting
aspects were noted. In the case of Dwarkabai although application was filed
by Dwarkabai in her capacity as widow of Wamanrao Kulkarni; she never
applied in her individual capacity as a freedom fighter. At some stage of the
proceeding when she filed affidavit the name of Dwarkabai came to be written
as a freedom fighter and the supporting freedom fighters who were ready to
swear affidavit in support of anybody stated in their affidavits that Wamanrao
- 844 -
as well as Dwarkabai were freedom fighters and she was involved with the
supporting freedom fighters in the particular incidents stated. Dwarkabai was
ultimately granted Sanmanpatra, pension etc. as a freedom fighter and not as
widow of Wamanrao. In the case of Mahadev Mankale the application was
filed by Mahadev and pending the application, he died. His widow claimed as
legal representative (widow) but in the affidavit filed by her later on stated
that she was also a freedom fighter and the supporting freedom fighters went
to the extent of stating that she was involved in the incidents stated and was
granted Sanmanpatra on the basis of such affidavit when in fact she had not
even applied for the same and the application was of her husband. In the
individual cases these aspects are discussed. There are also some other cases
of this type. These cases lead to an irresistable inference that the affidavits
were filed by the claimants and the supporting freedom fighters without
having least regard for the truth of the contents. Had the supporting freedom
fighters slightest regard for truth, they would have never asserted that this
woman who did not claim to be freedom fighter in her individual capacity had
taken part and was involved in the incidents stated in the affidavit.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti as well as High Power Committee were also
aware that these supporting freedom fighters have been indiscriminately filing
affidavits and in two different files at least the Member Secretary even found
it is necessary to hold inquiry and there was a direction which in fact
amounted to order to conduct inquiry and the note in the file stated that order
was sent to the Collector but the inquiry was never held which obviously
means that no such order was ultimately forwarded to the Collector to hold
inquiry. Had the Collector been directed to hold inquiry by written order, he
would definitely have started the inquiry. Such a serious direction was
suppressed without taking further steps and surprisingly enough in the very
same case the affidavits so severely criticized by the Member Secretary were
at a later stage accepted and the same Member Secretary recommended that
the claims be sanctioned despite the said affidavits on record. Even the Zilla
Gaurav Samiti observed in Case file No.9 – Bhagwan Dhondiba Chaure in
respect of four freedom fighters who were filing supporting affidavits
indiscriminately.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti as well as the High Power Committee were
even aware that in Beed district number of persons have already secured
Sanmanpatra and allied benefits on the basis of bogus warrant. The
Commission has already referred to the proceedings Zilla Gaurav Samiti in
1995 in the general reasons on warrant cases and also to the note of Sabhapati
that time has come to control and curtail such cases in Beed district as the
Government is required to sanction claims on the basis of false and fabricated
documents. It is really shocking that later on, on the basis of the same
warrant the claim was sanctioned and even the Sabhapati agreed with the
contradictory note put up after such a strong observation by him in earlier
note.
The Zilla Gaurav Samiti in many cases found that the warrant
produced (copy) was not reliable but it went on to recommend the cases
stating that it was convinced that the claimant/respondent was freedom fighter.
Unfortunately the Government Resolution did not leave it to that conviction
- 846 -
i.e. to the subjective satisfaction of the Zilla Gaurav Samiti but it required the
Samiti to be satisfied on the basis of evidence produced before it.
Another aspect of the matter is claims rejected once, twice and even
thrice were reconsidered without practically any new material on record when
in place of earlier two affidavits, affidavits of other two freedom fighters that
also from the list to which the Commission has made reference in general
reasons part pertaining to the cases of underground freedom fighters, were
relied upon and accepted even though these affidavits contained a totally
different version than the one stated earlier by the claimant freedom fighter
and by the supporting freedom fighters.
extent. All these circumstances led the Commission to scrutinize the evidence
with minute details. When all the circumstances indicated that the warrants
were not genuine and comparison of the signatures on different warrants
fortified the suspicious felt by the
Commission, the Commission took the step to send the disputed warrants for
examination by handwriting expert that also because the Commission found
some undisputed correspondence in the file of Tahasildar Patoda signed by the
same person. The Commission got the signatures on various warrants
examined through the Government Handwriting Expert. The other
circumstances which led the Commission to suspect genuineness of the
warrants are already stated in the part of general reasons of warrant cases and
need no repetitions.
All this led to perpetuation of fraud. It was really disgusting for the
Commission when such facts and circumstances were revealed while
scrutinizing the evidence.
The Commission is not called upon to opine as to how the High Power
Committee should function. However, the Commission feels that it should
have held regular meetings to consider the claims and should not have worked
in the manner in which any department of Mantralaya works. If the staff is
aware that matter will be discussed in meeting of which Chairman is the Chief
Minister, it would have prepared notes carefully and would naturally not have
- 848 -
twisted the facts as noted in many cases. However, the Commission also
agrees that the Committee alone can decide how it should function and is not
inclined to advise the Government about the procedure.
With these remarks the report is closed. The cases in which the
Commission has recommended cancellation may be considered by the
Government for taking action as deemed fit. The decision has ultimately to be
taken by the Government.
- 849 -
PART - XVI
ANNEXURE I
ANNEXURE II
10. Govt. Middle Cum High School Dharur Tal. Dharur School Admission
and Leaving Register extract about Maruti Raghunath Mundhe (Resp. No. 89)
11. CPS Hol ZP Tah. Mominabad School Admission and Leaving Register
extract about Tukaram Salba Ghuge (Resp No. 218)
12. Z.P. (Education Division) Beed list of 26 persons with their date of
birth produced under signature of Education Officer
- 851 -
ANNEXURE III A
ANNEXURE III B
ANNEXURE III C
ANNEXURE IV
ANNEXURE V
ANNEXURE VI
ANNEXURE VII
ANNEXURE VIII
ANNEXURE IX
ANNEXURE X
ANNEXURE XI
PART - XVII
*
*******
**************
*******************
**************
*******