ORDER :

1. This writ petition filed by rape victim seeking termination of her pregnancy being rape victim on account of her health condition, which was permitted by this Court by order dated 20.10.2020. However, finding difficulty in getting the victim examined by Female Gynecologist at District Hospital, Janjgir-Champa, this Court on 20.10.2020 directed to the Principal Secretary(Health)/Secretary (Health) to ensure that there is atleast one Female Gynecologist posted at all District Hospitals at the District Headquarters of every Districts in the State.

2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr.Amrito Das, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents/State, would inform to the Court that in all district hospitals of the State 205 posts of specialist are sanctioned posts of specialist includes the post of Female Gynecologist, but out of 205 posts, only 50 specialists are working. He would further submit that the post of specialist is promotional post from Post Graduate Medical Officer, but on account of non-availability of member of said category, promotion on the posts of specialist which includes Female Gynecologist could not be done, however, it will be done expeditiously as in December, 2020 also, meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee was convened and 27 specialists were promoted which have been posted in different district hospitals and in most of the hospitals, the State Government is trying its level best to appoint Gynecologist and further steps will be taken within 3 months from today to fill-up the remaining posts of specialist which includes Male and Female Gynecologist in every districts and thereafter every districts will have the facility of Female Gynecologist for specialized treatment.

3. The Supreme Court in the matter of Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samiti and others v. State of W.B. and another, (1996) 4 SCC 37 held that providing adequate medical facilities for the people is an essential part of obligations undertaken by the Government in a welfare State and held as under:

“9. The Constitution envisages the establishment of a welfare state at the federal level as well as at the State level. In a welfare State the primary duty of the Government is to secure the welfare of the people. Providing adequate medical facilities for the people is an essential part of the obligations undertaken by the Government in a welfare State. The Government discharges this obligation by running hospitals and health centres which provide medical care to the person seeking to avail those facilities. Article 21 imposes an obligation on the State to safeguard the right to life of every person. Preservation of human life is thus of paramount importance. The Government hospitals run by the State and the medical officers employed therein are duty bound to extend medical assistance for preserving human life. Failure on the part of a Government hospital to provide timely medical treatment to a person in need of such treatment results in violation of his right to life guaranteed under Article 21. In the present case there was breach of the said right of Hakim Seikh guaranteed under Article 21 when he was denied treatment at the various Government hospitals which were approached even though his condition was very serious at that time and he was in need of immediate medical attention. Since the said denial of the right of Hakim Seikh guaranteed under Article 21 was by officers of the State in hospitals run by the State the State cannot avoid its responsibility for such denial of the constitutional right of Hakim Seikh. In respect of deprivation of the constitutional rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution the position is well settled that adequate compensation can be awarded by the court for such violation by way of redress in proceedings under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution. [See : Rudal Sah v. State of Bihar, (1983) 4 SCC 141, Nilabati Behara v. State of Orissa, (1993) 2 SCC 746, Consumer Edu