SHARMA, J. - (1.) THE petitioner, an old woman of 95 years, was married to one Ajmer Singh who used to serve the State of Rajasthan as Compositor in Government Central Press Jaipur. Ajmer Singh got retired from the service in 1954 and expired on November 30, 1958. Till death Ajmer Singh was receiving the pension and after his death the State of Rajasthan started providing family pension to the petitioner at the rate of Rs. 19/- per month. But suddenly after 1960 payment of family pension was stopped without assigning any reason. THE respondents were approached many a times by the petitioner but no relief was granted to her. THEreafter instant writ petition was filed after serving the notice for demand of justice on the respondents.
(2.) IN the reply submitted by the respondents it was pleaded that the family pension was payable to the petitioner only upto March 11, 1960 and thereafter P. P. O. was sent to the Accountant General for record vide letter No. 2522 dated May 24, 1960. Since the petitioner being old woman could not inform about P. P. O. number, the tracing of old record was not possible and the respondents could not proceed in the matter. I have heard the rival submissions. The principle aim of a socialist State as envisaged in the Preamble of the Constitution of India is to eliminate inequality in income and status and standards of life. The basic frame work of socialism is to provide a decent standard of life to the working people and especially provide security from cradle to grave. Article 39 (e) requires the State to secure that the health and strength of workers, men and women and children of tender age are not abused and that citizens are not forced by economic necessity to enter avocations unsuited to their age or strength. Article 41 obligates the State within the limits of its economic capacity and development, to make effective provision for securing the right to work to education and to provide assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement and in other cases undeserved want. Article 43 (3) requires the State to endeavour to secure amongst other things full enjoyment of leisure and social and cultural opportunities. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in D. S. Nakora vs. U. O. I. (1), indicated that in the course of transformation of society from feudal to welfare and as socialistic thinking acquired respectability, State is under an obligation to provide security in old age. But the State in the present case left the petitioner in lurch in her old age. For the last forty four years the petitioner without any reason has been deprived of her legal right. The scheme of pension is to provide pension to the pensioner for the service rendered and to grant family pension to the dependent after the death of the pensioner. The petitioner was dependent on her late husband, who died in 1958 and therefore she had received family pension till March 11, 1960 at the rate of Rs. 19/- per month. The act of respondent in depriving the petitioner of her legal right is violative of Article 16 and 21 of the Constitution.
(3.) I therefore allow the writ petition and direct the respondents to pay the petitioner provisional pension in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. fifty thousand) within thirty days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The respondents are further directed to settle the family pension case of the petitioner till July 31, 2004, failing which the petitioner shall be continuously paid Rs. 200/- per month as family pension w. e. f. August 1, 2004. The petitioner shall also be entitled to the cost of this writ petition which is quantified as Rs. 2000/- (Rs. Two thousand ). .;