LAKSHMIKANT PANDINY Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice for contempt is discharged on account of the following circumstances: (i) in the smaller State where there is no compliance, there is no scope of any foreign adoption taking place; and (ii) the major States have complied with the essential aspects of the direction; and Mr. Pandey says that there is no need to continue the contempt proceedings.

(2.) Heard Mr. Pandey, petitioner, in this case in person and the counsel for the Union of India as also the different States. We find that there are 3 main prayers made in this application; one is for locating the orphan-home under Central Act No. X of 1960. It is pointed out to us that though at the time of filing the petition in this case, such homes had not been established, 4 by now such homes have been established in all States and Union Territory excepting State of Madhya Pradesh and the Union Territory of Delhi. Counsel appearing for the State and the Union Territory have agreed before us that given 3 months' time such homes shall be established and the said Act shall be brought into force.

(3.) The next prayer is about the provision of funds for every orphan. Initially, it was Rs.150 p.m. and with the filing of the petition and the matter being debated in Court, the amount has already been raised to Rs.250 p.m. This amount covers all the expenses to be incurred on the child. Counsel for the Manipur States points out that the sum has now been raised even beyond Rs.250 in some of these cases. At the moment, we do riot intend to examine the sufficiency of the allotment but would suggest that the periodic revision may be made so that the requirements of children would not be overlooked and this revision may be once in 3 years and the first revision should be considered in the year 1992.