V. V. S. RAO, J. ( 1 ) AT the outset, this Court must observe that an instantaneous reaction to injustice must be part of the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of india to protect the fundamental rights of the citizens and to put the State and the government in their limits. This case would demonstrate that this Court is justified in making these observations. ( 2 ) THE petitioner was a freedom fighter. He fought against the all powerful Nizam state of Hyderabad. In accordance with the scheme of the State Government to give pension to freedom fighters, he applied for the same some time in 1978. The Tahsildar enquired into his application and sent a report on 19-5-1980. Based on such report, the Government issued an order being g. O. Ms. No. 3469, Revenue (FF. II) department, dated 1-8-1980 sanctioning, on provisional basis, the freedom fighters pension under the said scheme to the petitioner at Rs. 200. 00 per month with effect from 6-3-1978. The pension sanctioned is for the lifetime of the recipient. The petitioner was also requested by the Government to submit pension papers including his photograph in duplicate, specimen signatures, left hand thumb impression, finger impressions, date of birth certificate etc. , to the concerned Tahsildar to enable the accountant General to issue pension payment order to him. The petitioner appears to have complied with the requirements, but he was not paid any pension. Therefore, he filed the writ petition on 26-7-1994 when he was aged 69 years. He seeks a declaration that the action of the respondents in not releasing pension in terms of G. O. Ms. No. 3469, dated 1-8-1980 with effect from 6-3-1978 at the rate of rs. 200/- per month is illegal and violative of principles of natural justice. Rule Nisi was served on the Government long back, but no counter-affidavit is filed. ( 3 ) IN a case like this where the petitioner claims a right based on a Government order, it is reasonable to infer that all the petition averments stand admitted. It is improper for the Government and the respondents to sleep over the matters by not even filing a counter-affidavit. Therefore, Sri s. Lakshma Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner, is justified in contending that until the Government Order is withdrawn or reviewed, the respondents cannot withdraw the release of pension. It is improper for the Government and the respondents to sleep over the matters by not even filing a counter-affidavit. Therefore, Sri s. Lakshma Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner, is justified in contending that until the Government Order is withdrawn or reviewed, the respondents cannot withdraw the release of pension. ( 4 ) THE object of granting pension to the freedom fighters under the State scheme or national scheme is that those citizens who have sacrificed their best part of childhood and youth foregone their life for the sake of nation must not live in penury in their evening of their life. While their one foot is almost in the grave, the freedom fighters must not suffer starvation, negligence nor indifference from the kith and kin. Though the amount sanctioned as pension is meagre, it would certainly help the freedom fighter at least to have a square meal a day. When such was the object and when the pension is granted by the State in recognition of his yeoman services, it is unfortunate that the officials by their lethargy, recalcitrant attitude and procrastinative governance should deny the old men and women the meagre amount by not being prompt. These acts on the part of the respondents must be condemned. It must not be ignored that an administrative law in a given case declared decisions could be invalidated on the ground of arbitrariness. ( 5 ) IN the result, the writ petition is allowed. The District Collector, Karimnagar, the second respondent herein, shall take immediate necessary action to see that the entire amount of pension is released and paid to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from to-day, if necessary by taking special sanction from the highest authorities. The District Collector shall also pay the costs of this writ petition set at Rs. 10,000. 00 (Rupees Ten thousand only) to the petitioner forthwith.