S.K.RAY, J. - (1.)THIS is an application by a detenu under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for a direction to the District Magistrate, Balasore and the Secretary, Home Department, Government of Orissa, to provide him with specs at the cost of the State.
(2.)THE petitioner was detained under the Act pursuant to an order of detention passed by opposite party No.1 under Section 3(1)(a)(ii) of the Act dated 4.2.1976 as the detention of the petitioner was necessary for dealing effectively with emergency. This declaration was duly confirmed by the State Government within the period prescribed by law. During the course of this detention the petitioner developed eye trouble and found it very difficult to read and write. The eye trouble became so serious that the Superintendent of Jail with the previous sanction of the District Magistrate removed the petitioner to the District Hospital for affording him special treatment there. After necessary examination and treatment the specialist issued a prescription for constant use of specs. The prescription was produced by the learned counsel for the State for our inspection. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation to the detaining authority on 3.2.1976 for providing him with specs as prescribed by the eye -specialist, at the earliest possible date on the ground that he had no independent earning. He also sent a reminder subsequently on 15.2.1976 (Annexure 2) in which he has expressly alleged that "it is not possible on my part to afford specs due to horrible pecuniary condition owing to my detention." When his representation went unheeded ha filed the present application in which he has alleged that his eye -sight was gradually worsening and deteriorating due to non -use of specs.
Without denying the factual averments made in the writ application, the case of the opposite parties is set out in para, 4 of the counter which runs as follows : -

"That the conditions of detention of persons detained under MISA and the facilities which are admissible to them have been laid down in the Orissa Security Prisoners (Conditions of Detention) Order, 1971. This order has been framed by the State Government in pursuance of Section 5 of MISA. Under these orders, a detenu is not entitled to be supplied with spectacles at Government cost. Even though medicines are provided to the detenus for their treatment at Government cost, spectacles cannot be provided as they do not fall within the category of medicines, but under the category of medical appliances. Hence the petitioner is not entitled to be supplied with spectacles at Government cost. The petitioner may however obtain sufficient money from his own resources to purchase the spectacles and the question of according permission for this purpose will be considered if the petitioner makes such a request to the State Government. The deponent further submits that matters relating to supplying spectacles and similar other amenities and facilities to a detenu are purely administrative functions within the discretion of the State Government and no writ petition can lie on this matter."

(3.)THE petitioner has specifically asserted in para. 5 of his petition : -
"That as a result of detention I have been devoid of all resources and ability to afford for specs. I have even been denied family subsistence allowance by the O.P."
The opposite party in his counter has referred to para 5 of the writ petition; but has not denied the averments as to petitioner's penurious condition and financial inability to purchase the specs as per the prescription of the specialist on account of his detention. This is what has been stated in the counter : -
"That with regard to averment in para 5 of the writ petition, the deponent submits that under Clause 32 of the Orissa Security Prisoners (Conditions of Detention) Order, 1971, the detenus are permitted to receive funds from their relatives and friends subject to the conditions specified in the aforesaid clause. Hence the contentions of the petitioner in this paragraph are not tenable."
There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner has any affluent relatives or friends who could contribute the cost of the specs. There can, therefore, be no doubt that the petitioner has no independent source of income, that he has not been given any family allowance and that there is no other possibility of his coming into funds while in detention.