SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(SC) 1250

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Madan B. Lokur, Deepak Gupta, JJ.
Dr. Ashwani Kumar – Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
WRIT PETITION © No. 193 OF 2016
Decided On : 13-12-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Mathew Cherian, Mr. Nikhil Dey, Ms. Kinjal Sampat, Dr. Ashwani Kumar Petitioner-in-person (NP), Ms. Raushan Tara Jaswal, Ms. Amita Joseph, Ms. Vani Vyas, Mr. Mohit Kaushik, Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Mr. Ravi Chandra Prakash, Bhanu Priya Sharma, Mr. Ashutosh Chaturvedi, Mr. Amit, Ms. Sushma Singh, Mr. Abhishek Tripathi, Mr. Sanjeeb Panigrahi, Mr. Purushottam Sharma Tripathi, Advs.
For the Respondent: Mr. A.N.S. Nadkarni, Ms. V. Mohana, Mr. V.V. Pattabhiram, Mr. S.K. Gupta, Ms. Madhavi Diwan, Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, Mr. Shalinder Saini, Ms. Snidha Mehra, Mr. B.V. Balaramdas, Mr. D.L. Chidanand, Mr. G.S. Makker, Ms. Suhasini Sen, Mr. M.P. Gupta, Mr. Prashant Rawat, Ms. Priya Mishra, Ms. Anil Katiyar, Advs.

IMPORTANT POINT
Right to live guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution must be given an expansive meaning. It encompasses right to live with dignity, the right to shelter and the right to health. State is obliged to ensure protection and enforcement of these rights and making them available to all.

Headnote:Constitution of India – Article 21 – Right to live with dignity – Part of right to live – Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension Scheme – Old age pension – Rs. 200 per month for persons between 60-79 years of age and Rs. 500 per month for persons above 80 years of age – Amount fixed more than a decade ago – National Social Assistance Programme (NSAP) – Need for all Governments to work in tandem to make the Pension Scheme workable and meaningful emphasized – Limited economic capacity of the State an important factor – Issue needs to be looked at from humanitarian aspect as well. (Para 8, 16, 18, 19,

       (1981) 1 SCC 608; (2011) 4 SCC 454; (2018) 5 SCC 1; (1993) 1 SCC 645 – Relied upon

       Constitution of India – article 21 – Right to live – Right to shelter or right to reasonable accommodation – Applicable to elderly people as well – Subject to “economic budgeting” by the State – Integrated Programme for Senior Citizens – To improve the quality of life of the Senior Citizens by providing basic amenities like shelter, food, medical care and entertainment opportunities. (Para 21, 25, 26, 27)

       AIR 1990 SC 630; (1996) 2 SCC 549; (1997) 11 SCC 121 – Relied upon

       Constitution of India – Article 21 – Right to health – Elderly persons – Medical facilities and geriatric care – National Programme for Healthcare of the Elderly – To provide separate and specialised comprehensive healthcare to senior citizens at various levels of the State healthcare delivery system including outreach services – Must be implemented with due earnestness. (Para 32, 35)

       (1987) 2 SCC 165; (1995) 3 SCC 42; (1996) 2 SCC 682; (1997) 2 SCC 83; (2006) 13 SCC 382; (2014) 3 SCC 547 – Relied upon

       Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 – Section 19 – Old age home in every district having accommodation for 150 indigent senior citizens – 300 homes constructed – Not adequate – Implementation not satisfactory. (Para 38)

       Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 – Section 20 – Medical support for senior citizens – Huge gap between the law and its implementation – Lack of publicity to provisions of the Act. (Para 40, 42)

       Constitution of India – Article 21 – Right to life – Must be given an expansive meaning – Encompasses right to live with dignity, the right to shelter and the right to health – State obliged to ensure protection and enforcement of these rights and making them available to all – Not only directions but continuous monitoring by Supreme Court required – Directions issued. (Para 44, 45, 47, 50)

       Facts of the case:

       This petition draws attention to the hapless condition of old age people.

       The rights of elderly persons is one such emerging situation that was perhaps not fully foreseen by our Constitution framers. Therefore, while there is a reference to the health and strength of workers, men and women, and the tender age of children in Article 39 of the Constitution and to public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement and in other cases of undeserved want in Article 41 of the Constitution, there is no specific reference to the health of the elderly or to their shelter in times of want and indeed to their dignity and sustenance due to their age.

       The petitioner seeks four reliefs:

       1. Pension for the elderly.

       2. Shelter for the elderly.

       3. Geriatric care and medical facilities for the elderly.

       4. Effective implementation of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (‘MWP Act’).

       

       Finding of the Court:

       Right to live guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution must be given an expansive meaning. It encompasses right to live with dignity, the right to shelter and the right to health. State is obliged to ensure protection and enforcement of these rights and making them available to all

       Result: Continuous monitoring commenced.

JUDGMENT

Madan B. Lokur, J.

1. “Social justice” in the Preamble of our Constitution has been given pride of place and for good reason since it is perhaps the most important and significant form of justice.

2. In his address on Constitution Day on 26th November, 2018 the Hon’ble President of India emphasised that social justice remains a touchstone of our nation building. The conceptualisation of justice by our Constitution framers was as much valid in 1949 (when the Constituent Assembly debates took place) as it is today. But, with times having changed, varied situations have emerged which may not have existed in 1949 and were perhaps not foreseen at that time. The Hon’ble President spoke on the subject of justice and particularly social justice in the following words:

“In the Preamble, justice is not seen as unidimensional. It is viewed as having implications across political, economic and social spheres. Political justice implies the equal participation of all adults in the political process and the just formulation and implementation of laws. Economic justice implies the ultimate eradication of poverty, equal opportunities to earn a livelihood, and fair wages. As such the expansion of economic, entrepreneurship and job opportunities are among examples of economic justice.

Given the diverse history of our people, and given imbalances and hierarchies that have sometimes marked our past, social justice remains a touchstone of our nation building. At the simplest level, it implies the removal of societal imbalances and the harmonisation of rival claims and needs of different communities and groups. Social justice is about providing equal opportunities.

Such a conceptualisation of justice was valid in 1949 and broadly remains relevant today. Even so, the 21st century has brought new challenges. No doubt the concept of justice -political, economic and social – has a resilient core but it needs to be thought of in innovative ways. It requires to be applied afresh to emerging situations – situations that may not have existed or been foreseen when our Constitution framers were at work.” (Emphasis supplied by us).

3. The rights of elderly persons is one such emerging situation that was perhaps not fully foreseen by our Constitution framers. Therefore, while there is a reference to the health and strength of workers, men and women, and the tender age of children in Article 39 of the Constitution and to public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement and in other cases of undeserved want in Article 41 of the Constitution, there is no specific reference to the health of the elderly or to their shelter in times of want and indeed to their dignity and sustenance due to their age.

4. Eventually, age catches up with everybody and on occasion, it renders some people completely helpless and dependent on others, either physically or mentally or both. Fortunately, our Constitution is organic and this Court is forward looking. This combination has resulted in path-breaking developments in law, particularly in the sphere of social justice which has been given tremendous importance and significance in a variety of decisions rendered by this Court over the years. The present petition is one such opportunity presented before this Court to recognise and enforce the rights of elderly persons -rights that are recognised by Article 21 of the Constitution as understood and interpreted by this Court in a series of decisions over a period of several decades, and rights that have gained recognition over the years due to emerging situations.

Brief background

5. The petitioner Dr. Ashwani Kumar has preferred a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution with regard to enforcement of the rights of elderly persons under Article 21 of the Constitution. The petitioner, who appears in person, has made several prayers in the writ petition but during the course of submissions, he limited the relief prayed for to four issues. These























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top