Orissa High Court
Geeta Rath vs State Of Odisha & Others ... Opposite ... on 25 April, 2025
Author: Sashikanta Mishra
Bench: Sashikanta Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.4050 of 2025
(Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of
India)
Geeta Rath ... Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha & others ... Opposite Parties
Advocates appeared in the case through hybrid mode:
For Petitioner : Mr.Nihal Rath,
Advocate.
-versus-
For Opposite Parties : Mr. S.R.Pattnaik, A.G.A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:
JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
JUDGMENT
25.4.2025.
Sashikanta Mishra,J. The Petitioner has approached this Court
claiming the following prayer:
"It is therefore most humbly prayed
that this Hon'ble Court may graciously
be pleased to admit this writ
application, issue Rule NISI in the
nature of writ of mandamus directing
the opp. parties to issue Green Card in
favour of the petitioner on the basis of
surgery certificate dtd.21.10.1998 at
Annexdure-2 within a stipulated
period."
2. The facts of the case are that the Petitioner
underwent an operation on 21.10.1998 at Shanti
Hospital, Cuttack for ovarian cyst by endoscopy and
during the said process, she, with her consent,
underwent tubectomy operation in order to support the
moral cause of the Government for universally
recognized move for rapid reduction in the high growth
rate of population. The Government of Odisha in
Health and Family Welfare Department issued
resolution dtd.19.10.1983 for issue of Green Card to
individual acceptors of terminal methods for availing
benefits under various schemes of the Government.
The petitioner claims to have fulfilled the required
criteria laid down in such scheme. Her husband
submitted a representation to the Director, Family
Welfare for issue of Green Card to his wife (Petitioner)
on 13.11.2023. The CDM and PHO, Cuttack vide letter
dtd.17.11.2023 sought for permission of the Director
for preparation and issue of new Green Card after
verification of available documents. The Director,
Family Welfare instructed the CDMO and PHO,
Cuttack to issue Green Card after inquiring into the
following points as per resolution of the Government
dtd.19.10.1983 and 18.11.1998;
(i) Whether Shanti Hospital had got
accreditation for conducting sterilization
operation (Tubectomy/Vasectomy)
during the time of operation i.e. 1998.
(ii) Whether the operating Surgeon was
the empaneled Surgeon at that point of
time.
(iii) Whether the name and date of
operation was informed to the district on
that financial year 1998-99.
(iv) Verification report towards eligibility
for issue of Green Card must be
submitted by the para medical staff.
3. By order dated 1.1.2024, the CDMO and PHO,
Cuttack asked the Proprietor, Shanti Hospital, Cuttack
to submit the documents. The Management of Shanti
Hospital intimated that the Hospital was in a very low
lying area of Cuttack and during the devastating 1999
super-cyclone, all the records had been damaged. As
such, the CDMO and PHO, Cuttack expressed his
inability to issue Green Card vide his letter
dtd.6.1.2025. It is stated that because of such refusal,
the right of the petitioner's daughter for being enrolled
as a Post Graduate student in reputed Government
College against 5% reservation for Green Card category
as per the relevant guideline has been taken away. On
such facts, the instant writ petition has been filed with
the prayer as quoted above.
4. Counter affidavit has been filed by the C.D.M.O
and PHO (Opp. Party No.3) stating therein that by
letter dated 12.3.2025, the authorities of Shanti
Memorial Hospital certified the authenticity of the
discharge certificate of the Petitioner to be genuine and
authentic. Further, from the discharge certificate, it
was found that she had undergone operation for
Adhesiolysis of both chocolate cysts of ovaries in the
year 1998 and during such operation, other
procedures and bilateral tubectomy was done. Since
the Petitioner had not voluntarily undergone the
terminal method of tubectomy as per resolution of the
Government, she is not entitled to any relief
thereunder. That apart, despite being operated way
back in the year 1998, she applied for the Green Card
after more than 25 years.
5 Heard Mr. Nihal Rath, learned counsel for the
Petitioner, Mr. S.R. Pattanaik, learned Addl.
Government Advocate for the State.
6. Mr. Rath would argue that being no dispute that
the Petitioner had undergone tubectomy in 1998, is
entitled to be issued with Green Card as per the
relevant Government resolution. The concerned
hospital could not produce the documents because the
same were lost during the super-cyclone but
nevertheless certified the discharge certificate as being
authentic and genuine. Under such circumstances,
refusal of the authorities to issue Green Card to the
Petitioner is unjustified.
7. Mr. S.R. Pattanaik, learned Addl. Government
Advocate, would argue that the Petitioner has come up
with a stale claim inasmuch as she allegedly
underwent tubectomy in the year 1998, which was
never voluntary, but approached the authorities only
in the year 2023. Her claim therefore, does not merit
any consideration.
8. It is the petitioner's own case that she
underwent surgery for certain complications on
21.10.1998 at Shanti Hospital, Cuttack, during which
she also underwent tubectomy. There is no whisper in
the Writ Petition as to why she remained silent for all
these years without raising claim for issue of Green
Card as per the provisions of the relevant Government
resolution. She appears to have approached the
authorities for the first time in the year 2023, which
being turned down, she approached this Court in the
year 2025. More than 27 years have been elapsed in
the meantime. As already stated, the Petitioner has not
submitted any explanation whatsoever for such belated
approach before the authority. It is trite law that stale
claims are not to be entertained by the authorities. It is
also trite law that stale claims cannot be entertained
by this Court exercising writ jurisdiction under Articles
226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
9. For the foregoing reasons therefore, this Court
finds no merit in the Writ Petition, which is therefore
dismissed.
................................
Sashikanta Mishra,
Judge
Ashok Kumar Behera
Designation: A.D.R.-cum-Addl. Principal Secretary
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 29-Apr-2025 11:57:33
