JUDGMENT : N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J. This case has been registered as suo motto PIL on the basis of the note put up by the Registrar Judicial on 25.09.2014 on the basis of a communication from Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bansi Lal Bhat based on representation submitted by Chairman, Jammu and Kashmir Disabled Welfare Association situated near Arya Samaj Mandir, Akhnoor, seeking enhancement of pension in respect of Handicapped persons/widows and old age persons as they are getting less pension as compared to the pension granted in other States. 2. On 29.09.2014, this Court issued notice to the State and also requested the learned Advocate General to file response within four weeks. On 27.11.2014, M/s. S.S Ahmed and Suraj Singh volunteered to act as amicus in the case. 3. The social welfare department filed a status report on 16.12.2014 stating that the said department has taken up the matter with the Planning and Development Department for consideration of enhancement of pension under various schemes and the response from the Planning and Development Department is awaited. It is also stated in the said report that as and when the concurrence from the Planning and Development Department/Finance Department, as the case may be, is received, the pension to the said persons will be enhanced under rules. 4. In order to expedite consideration of proposal in compliance to the interim directions issued by this Court, the matter was taken up by the Finance Department with the Planning and Development Department and on 17.03.2015 the Planning and Development Department conveyed that the Planning & Development Department although appreciates the increase of central beneficiary share, however, the State share enhancement needs to be deferred for the time being till the resource position of the State improves. 5. This Court being not satisfied with the said report directed the respondents to file additional status report mentioning the number of persons who are getting pension under two schemes namely Integrated Social Security Scheme and National Social Assistance Programme and a further report was filed which gives the details as follows:- “A. Integrated Social Security Scheme (ISS) Category No. of approved cases (getting pension) Old Age 146804 Widow 133944 Handicapped 141752 Total 422500 B. National Social Assistant Programme (NSAP) Category No. of approved cases (getting pension) IGNOAPS 139325 IGNWPS 8334 IGNDPS 2789 Total 150448 6. Thus, in total 4,22,500 persons are getting monthly pension of Rs. Thus, in total 4,22,500 persons are getting monthly pension of Rs. 500/- each from 1994 under the Integrated Social Security Scheme (ISSS) and 150448 persons are getting Rs. 500/- each from 1995 under National Social Assistance Programme (NSAP). It is also stated in the said status report that the Government at the relevant time made announcement at the floor of Legislature that enhancement of pension to widows and physically challenged persons having disability of 60% or more is waiting concurrence from the Finance Department and as and when concurrence is received from the Finance Department, the matter will be apprised before this Court. 7. Since the said stand was taken, report from the Finance Department was sought for and on 23.02.2016 The Finance Department filed the status report stating that enhancement of pension is a policy issue and the State cabinet has not yet taken any decision and no budgetary provision has been made for enhancing the pension and due to the poor financial condition of the State it is not possible to enhance the pension and the State need to wait for either liberal funding from the Central Government or the resource position to improve and thereafter only decision for enhancing the pension rates can be taken. 8. When the matter was heard on 23.02.2016 learned Advocate General sought time by stating that he will look into the matter so that a decision could be arrived at. Consequently the matter was listed on 01.03.2016 Learned counsel appearing for the Finance Department even today submitted that the Finance Department is unable to give concurrence for enhancement of pension due to want of resources. 9. On the above facts and circumstances, this Court is constrained to consider pitiable condition of the old aged pensioners, widow pensioners, handicapped persons, who are given pension under Integrated Social Security Scheme (ISSS) and National Social Assistance Programme, all of whom are paid Rs. 500/- per month as pension by way of social assistance from 1994 and 1995 respectively. The said sum of Rs. 500/- was fixed more than 20 years back. The money value got diminished considerably during the period of these 20 years. In other States the minimum pension was increased to Rs. 1000/- per month and the same is not disputed. 500/- per month as pension by way of social assistance from 1994 and 1995 respectively. The said sum of Rs. 500/- was fixed more than 20 years back. The money value got diminished considerably during the period of these 20 years. In other States the minimum pension was increased to Rs. 1000/- per month and the same is not disputed. The Social Welfare Department, which is looking after the social security schemes of the marginalized clause of persons have recommended for increase of the pension of the above two categories to Rs. 1,000/- per month and submitted the proposal to the Planning and Development Department as early as on 02.05.2014 and prayed for concurrence of the Planning and Development Department/Finance Department. The said proposal was kept pending and was not considered in the budget for the year 2015-16. Even in the budgetary provisions for the year 2016-17 no steps have been taken for allocation of funds for enhancing the pension to the really deserving persons, namely widows, old aged persons, handicapped persons with more than 60% disability, the total numbers of pensioners, according to the respondents comes to 5,72,948 persons. 10. In the case of State of Himachal Pradesh v. A. Parent of a Student of Medical College, Simila, (1985) 3 SCC 169 : (AIR 1985 SC 9), in para 4 of the judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that, “where the court finds on being moved by an aggrieved party or by any public spirited individual or social action group, that the executive is remiss in discharging its obligations under the Constitution or the law, so that the poor and the underprivileged continue to be subjected to exploitation and injustice or are deprived of their social and economic entitlements or that social legislation enacted for their benefit is not being implemented thus depriving them of the rights and benefits conferred upon them, the court certainly can and must intervene and compel the executive to carry out its constitutional and legal obligations”. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision reported as (2012) 7 SCC 407 (Samaj Parivartana Samudaya v. State of Karnataka) has held as under:- “44. Wherever and whenever the State fails to perform its duties, the Court shall step in to ensure that Rule of Law prevails over the abuse of process of law. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision reported as (2012) 7 SCC 407 (Samaj Parivartana Samudaya v. State of Karnataka) has held as under:- “44. Wherever and whenever the State fails to perform its duties, the Court shall step in to ensure that Rule of Law prevails over the abuse of process of law. Such abuse may result from inaction or even arbitrary action of protecting the true offenders or failure by different authorities in discharging statutory or legal obligations in consonance with the procedural and penal statutes……..” 12. It is not in dispute that a welfare state is bound to consider welfare of the poor and deserving, who are unable to earn their livelihood for their decent living. The right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India provides for life with minimum decency like food, shelter, health and other minimum amenities of life. By paying a petty amount of Rs. 500/- per month one cannot live a decent life and bearing in mind the said guaranteed right to the marginalized section of the society who are unable to sustain themselves and are already identified by the social welfare department are to be given enhanced pension as compared to the price index. 13. It is a fact that in the year 1994 or 1995 the minimum wages fixed based on the price index was Rs. 50/- per day by the Deputy Commissioners of the State and the said wage is raised by the State of Jammu and Kashmir at Rs. 150/- per day, which means that there is three fold increase in the minimum wages to the daily wagers. Even though the same is not comparable as the Government is extracting work from the workers, considering the fact that beneficiaries of the pension schemes are unable to do any job on their own to earn their livelihood, the Government is bound to increase the pension at Rs. 1,000/- per month as recommended by the Social Welfare Department of the State. 14. The only reason stated by the Finance Department is the financial difficulty faced by the State. 1,000/- per month as recommended by the Social Welfare Department of the State. 14. The only reason stated by the Finance Department is the financial difficulty faced by the State. It is settled principle of law that for raising of funds for ensuring free education, speedy justice, health care facilities, clean environment, which are guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, it is duty of the authorities running the administration to mobilize the funds and the responsible Government cannot shirk its responsibility and deny the said rights to the citizens on the ground of want of finance. In respect of free education, Hon'ble the Supreme Court considered the issue regarding the plea of paucity of funds raised by the State in the decision reported in AIR 2000 SC 634 (Chandigarh Administration v. Rajni Vali) and in paragraph Nos. 6 and 10 held thus: “6. …………..imparting primary and secondary education to students is the bounden duty of the State Administration. It is a Constitutional mandate that the State shall ensure proper education to the students on whom the future of the society depends. In line with this principle, the State has enacted Statutes and framed Rules and Regulations to control/regulate establishment and running of private schools at different levels. The State Government provides grant-in-aid to private schools with a view to ensure smooth running of the institution and to ensure that the standard of teaching does not suffer on account of paucity of funds. It needs no emphasis that appointment of qualified and efficient teachers is a sine qua non for maintaining high standard of teaching in any educational institution. Keeping in mind these and other relevant factors this Court in a number of cases has intervened for setting right any discriminatory treatment meted out to teaching and non-teaching staff of a particular institution or a class of institutions…” ………………………. 10. Coming to the contention of the appellants that the Chandigarh Administration will find it difficult to bear the additional financial burden if the claim of the respondents 1 to 12 is accepted, we need only say that such a contention raised in different cases of similar nature has been rejected by this Court. The State Administration cannot shirk its responsibility of ensuring proper education in schools and colleges on the plea of lack of resources. The State Administration cannot shirk its responsibility of ensuring proper education in schools and colleges on the plea of lack of resources. It is for the Authorities running the Administration to find out the ways and means of securing funds for the purpose. We do not deem it necessary to consider this question in further detail. The contention raised by the appellants in this regard is rejected………..” 15. The said plea being the only plea raised, which is being found erroneous, we are of the view that the pensioners who are getting Rs. 500/- per month under ISSS and NASP are entitled to get Rs. 1000/- per month atleast from 01.04.2016 The respondents are directed to implement the said direction i.e. to pay increased pension of Rs. 1000/- per month from April 01, 2016 and orders to that effect is directed to be passed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear that in case any of the beneficiary is not receiving the said amount of pension from the respondents, they are at liberty to approach the District Legal Services Authority/Tehsil Legal Service Authority and the said Authorities on receipt of such application/request from the beneficiary shall take up the matter with the concerned authorities of the Government and ensure that pensioners receives pension in time. The beneficiaries are also granted liberty to file applications which are not considered by the concerned officers/officials, before the concerned Legal Services Authority and the Authority shall forward the same to this Court along with its report for listing of such application before the appropriate Benches for necessary orders. 16. The Writ Petition is disposed of with above directions.