DR. ASHWANI KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
It is noted in the introduction to the Integrated Programme for Senior Citizens that there has been a steady rise in the population of senior citizens in India. The number of elderly persons has increased from 1.98 crore in 1951 to 7.6 crore in 2001 and 10.38 crore in 2011. It is projected that the number of 60+ in India would increase to 14.3 crore in 2021 and 17.3 crore in 2026. The main objective of the Programme “is to improve the quality of life of the Senior Citizens by providing basic amenities like shelter, food, medical care and entertainment opportunities …..” It is also proposed to encourage productive and active ageing through providing support for capacity building activities. It was submitted that under this Programme grant-in- DR. ASHWANI KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 1289 aid is given for running and maintenance of senior citizens homes, homes for elderly women etc. [Para 26][1303-B-D] A
3.4 There can be no doubt that the right to shelter is an important constitutional right and therefore shelter must be made available to everybody and to the maximum extent possible. With this in view, the Government of India has framed schemes, inter alia, for homeless persons particularly in urban areas but it is time to recognize that there are a large number of elderly persons in several parts of the country, including rural India, who are rendered ‘homeless’ due to migration of their families to other parts of the country and even outside the country. While some of these elderly persons are certainly not destitute, but they do need assistance because of their age and are willing to pay and contribute for a roof over their head. In the absence of a suitable number of old age homes, and homes as per their status, they are left to fend for themselves making them vulnerable to mishaps and other unforeseen events. [Para 27][1303-D-G] O R D E R For orders and directions, see W.P. (C) No. 193 of 2016 - Dr. Ashwani Kumar v. Union of India & Ors. Kalpana K. Tripathy Directions issued. B C D E F G H
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.