Kerala High Court slams State for citing patriarchal notions to deny father's Freedom Fighters Pension to daughter

The Kerala High Court recently came down heavily on the State government for denying Freedom Fighters' Pension to a divorced daughter of a freedom fighter [Neena T v State of Kerala]..Single-judge Justice Devan Ramachandran said that the State's decision smacked of archaic patriarchal notions since it was based on the ground that two of her brothers were in a position to take care of her."I am afraid that the afore submissions of the learned Government Pleader – which are also reflected in Ext.P5 – smack archaic patriarchal notions. Merely because the petitioner has two brothers, an automatic assumption drawn that she would be taken care of by them for her life, can only be seen to be one solely on account of the afore notions and nothing else," the Court said in its judgment.It, therefore, directed the State to reconsider her claim.The Court was considering a petition moved by one Neena, the daughter of late T Achuthan who was a freedom fighter. She had challenged an order of the State government that had rejected her request for freedom fighter's pension on the ground that two of her brothers are well-to-do and would take care of her..The government pleader defended the State's decision by arguing that the pension is meant only for those with no other anchor in life and that Neena's brothers were financially very well-off..The Courts said that the government's hypothesis that Neena would be taken care of by her brothers and that she would have to depend on them forever, "can certainly not be countenanced by this Court in this age and era.".The Court further noted that the criterion for the grant of pension was that the pension should be granted to only the “most deserving cases,” as per Rule 11A of the Kerala Freedom Fighters Pension Rules, 1971. This is a pure question of fact that will have to be assessed on the basis of all relevant aspects and not based on conjectures and surmises, solely on the basis that the petitioner has two brothers, the Court said..The Court, therefore, set aside the order of the government denying Neena her father's freedom fighter's pension. The government was directed to reconsider her claim after considering all facts and affording her an opportunity of being heard. .Advocate Masas P Hameed represented Neena.The State was represented by Government Pleader Appu PS..[Read Judgment]