By Our Correspondent
BHUBANESWAR: Supreme Court hears the suo motu case concerning the deplorable condition of a mother and her disabled son in Odisha
Odisha said the State provided a house under the Pradhan Mantri scheme. We have also provided another house under the State fund. We have also provided disability pension. Whatever is available, both under the State and Central schemes, has been provided.
They have also filed a fact-finding report. There are three pension schemes, but double benefit cannot be granted. She is availing pension under one scheme, the Indira Gandhi National Disability Pension Scheme. These are three alternative schemes and the option has to be exercised for one.
The only step remaining concerns the substantive benefit to be obtained by Japa Bui, a pucca house under the Antyodaya Grameen Yojana. The proposal is pending before the government.
Under this scheme, money is actually released after completion of the house. But the poor lady may not have adequate funds for construction. Let me discuss with the Collector and District Magistrate whether, as a special case, it can be released in advance for construction. One pucca house has already been given under the Pradhan Mantri Housing Scheme. This is an additional house. On the Court’s intervention, I discussed it with the District Magistrate. The government was pleased to give an additional one because the mother and son are living together and one is blind. We can make it in the son’s name, no issue. The State government has agreed in principle to give one additional house apart from the house under the Pradhan Mantri Housing Yojana. There are other brothers also. They have got one. Another brother has also got a house. The mother has got one. Additionally, we gave another one. This is the third house under a government scheme for one family. In law, they are in fact entitled to one.
