New Delhi, Feb 10 (IANS) The Supreme Court Wednesday rued the lack of basic civic amenities for a large portion of the population even six decades after the country gained freedom.
“How many of the people have access to basic amenities even after 60 years of independence? It is a matter of concern,” observed a bench of Justice Dalveer Bhandari and Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan, while delving into possible ways and means to mitigate the plight of million of country’s homeless.

The bench even spared a thought to the plight of millions of Mumbaikars, forced to live in tiny hutments in slums in India’s financial capital and wondered if they will not be better placed living in government-run night shelters for the homeless.

“Ten to 15 people have to live in just one tiny hutment,” observed the bench, adding “probably people in night shelters are better placed.”

Finding that not many states have been able to respond to its Jan 27 query over the status of availability of night shelters for homeless all over the country, the bench asked the defaulting states for a status report within six weeks.

The bench also asked the Union government to amend the Delhi Master Plan 2021 to provide at least one night shelter for every 100,000 of its population.

The bench also envisaged that these night shelters should be equipped with various basic amenities, including mobile toilets, electricity, kitchen etc.

The judges suggested the government should build these night shelters at such locations so that they may be readily accessible to the poor and homeless.

As the Delhi government apprised the court of its plans to provide biometric identity cards to over 14,815 homeless in phases with an entailing provision for 10 litres of kerosene and 15 kg of food grain to each card holder, senior counsel Colin Gonsalves, appearing for the petitioners, pointed out to the court that as per another central government scheme for food to the poor, known as Antodaya Scheme, each of the poor are entitled to 35 kg of food grain.

At this, the bench asked the Delhi government counsel to respond.