https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199981 Where a pension scheme prescribes the documentary proof required to establish a freedom fighter claim, the sufficiency and genuineness of that proof are matters for the competent Government to assess under the Scheme. The Court cannot itself reappreciate evidence or substitute its own factual finding on imprisonment eligibility for the administrative determination. On the facts noted, the Government had already examined the claimant's documents and found them insufficient to prove imprisonment, so the High Court's independent appraisal of evidence was impermissible. The claimant's declaration as a freedom fighter and consequent pension claim therefore did not survive. en-us Mon, 09 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Mar 2018 12:46:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199981 Where a pension scheme prescribes the documentary proof required to establish a freedom fighter claim, the sufficiency and genuineness of that proof are matters for the competent Government to assess under the Scheme. The Court cannot itself reappreciate evidence or substitute its own factual finding on imprisonment eligibility for the administrative determination. On the facts noted, the Government had already examined the claimant's documents and found them insufficient to prove imprisonment, so the High Court's independent appraisal of evidence was impermissible. The claimant's declaration as a freedom fighter and consequent pension claim therefore did not survive. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 09 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199981