SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Megh) 70

HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
Biswanath Somadder, H.S. Thangkhiew, JJ.
Registrar General, High Court of Meghalaya - Appellant
Versus
State of Meghalaya - Respondent
PIL No. 6/2021
Decided On : 24-08-2021

Advocates appeared:
A. Kumar, Advocate General, S. Sen Gupta, Addl. Sr. GA and A.H. Kharwanlang, GA, for the Respondents

IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the importance of addressing the method of implementation of government welfare schemes for the marginalised section of the society and advised the State not to insist on the production of AADHAAR Card as the only proof of identity.

Headnote:

Public Interest Litigation - Mandatory Vaccination and Implementation of Government Welfare Schemes for Marginalised Sections - The court addressed the issues of mandatory vaccination and the method of implementation of government welfare schemes for the marginalised section of the society in the State of Meghalaya. The court had already dealt with the issue of mandatory vaccination in a previous judgment and had issued directions regarding the implementation of welfare schemes. The court requested reports from the District Legal Services Authorities and advised the State not to insist on the production of AADHAAR Card as the only proof of identity.

Fact of the Case:

The court had previously addressed the issue of mandatory vaccination and issued directions regarding the implementation of government welfare schemes for the marginalised section of the society in the State of Meghalaya. The court requested reports from the District Legal Services Authorities and advised the State not to insist on the production of AADHAAR Card as the only proof of identity.

Finding of the Court:

The court had already dealt with the issue of mandatory vaccination in a previous judgment and had issued directions regarding the implementation of welfare schemes. The court requested reports from the District Legal Services Authorities and advised the State not to insist on the production of AADHAAR Card as the only proof of identity. The matter was adjourned for further consideration after four weeks.

Issues: The issues concerned mandatory vaccination and the method of implementation of government welfare schemes for the marginalised section of the society in the State of Meghalaya.

Ratio Decidendi: The court had already addressed the issue of mandatory vaccination and issued directions regarding the implementation of welfare schemes. The court requested reports from the District Legal Services Authorities and advised the State not to insist on the production of AADHAAR Card as the only proof of identity.

Final Decision: The matter was adjourned for further consideration after four weeks.

JUDGMENT

1. In this suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL), there were primarily two issues with which this Court was concerned. The first issue was with regard to the mandatory vaccination. By our judgment and order dated 23rd June, 2021, we have dealt with this issue of mandatory vaccination elaborately and nothing remains to be decided in this regard. So far as the other issue is concerned - which was with regard to the method of implementation of the Government Welfare Schemes meant for the marginalised section of the society in the State of Meghalaya - we had issued certain directions upon the Secretaries of the various District Legal Service Authority in our judgment and order dated 23rd June, 2021. Such directions were extended from time to time and the final extension was granted by this Court in terms of our earlier order dated 9th August, 2021. We are now informed by the Registry that the Secretaries of the District Legal Services Authorities have prepared extensive reports; a summary whereof shall be forwarded by the Registry to the learned Advocate General and the concerned authority of the State of Meghalaya so that they can respond to the same on the next date. The extensive detailed reports, which are also on record, can be inspected by the learned Advocate General and/or the concerned authority of the State, upon prior notice to the Registry.

2. Before we adjourn this matter, one observation is required to be made in respect of the vaccination policy presently adopted by the State of Meghalaya. In some places in the State of Meghalaya and particularly in remote villages, there are eligible persons who cannot be vaccinated simply because they do not possess any AADHAAR Card. We would request the State not to insist on production of AADHAAR Card as the only proof of identity since there are other recognised options available to citizens of India to present their proofs of identity.

3. List this matter after four weeks for further consideration.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top