Orissa High Court
Geeta Rath vs State Of Odisha & Others ... Opposite ... on 18 November, 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.Behera, A.G.A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:
JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
JUDGMENT
18.11.2025.
Sashikanta Mishra,J. The Petitioner has approached this Court
claiming the following relief:
"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. Be it noted that the Writ Petition was earlier
heard and dismissed vide judgment dated 25.4.2025.
However, said judgment was recalled as per judgment
dated 27.10.2025 passed in RVWPET No.157 of 2025
filed by the Petitioner on the ground that she had not
been heard on the ground on which the Writ Petition
was dismissed. Be it noted that the Writ Petition was
dismissed on the ground of delayed approach of the
Petitioner to this Court. The Review application was
allowed as it was found that the counsel for the
Petitioner was not heard on the question of delay and
further that the resolution of the Government
providing for issuance of Green Card and its benefits to
eligible persons does not contain any time stipulation.
The Judgment being recalled, the Writ Petition was
heard again.
3. 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 Cards 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,
Family Welfare for preparation and issue of new Green
Card after verification of available documents. The
Director instructed the CDM 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.
4. By order dated 1.1.2024, the CDM 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 CDM 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 guidelines has been taken away.
On such facts, the instant writ petition has been filed
with the prayer as quoted above.
5. Counter affidavit has been filed by the C.D.M
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 as 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 were 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.
6 Heard Mr. Nihal Rath, learned counsel for the
Petitioner and Mr. S.Behera, learned Addl. Government
Advocate for the State.
7. Mr. Nihal Rath would submit that the relevant
Government Resolutions do not stipulate any time for
claiming benefits under the Green Card Scheme. The
Petitioner raised a claim as her daughter is seeking
admission into the Post Graduate studies in medicine.
Since her mother (Petitioner) had undergone
tubectomy in 1998, she is entitled to 5% reservation
under Green Card category. The Petitioner's claim was
not entertained citing untenable grounds. Mr. Rath
would further argue that there being no dispute that
the Petitioner had undergone tubectomy in 1998, she
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 in 1999, but
nevertheless certified the discharge certificate as
authentic and genuine. Under such circumstances,
refusal of the authorities to issue Green Card to the
Petitioner is unjustified.
8. Mr. S. Behera, 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.
9. From the materials placed on record it is evident
that the Petitioner had underwent surgery on
21.10.1998 in Shanti Hospital for a condition called,
B/L endometroid (chocolate cysts), in course of which,
B/L tubectomy was also performed. However, the
Petitioner's husband requested the Director, Family
Welfare for issue of Green Card for the first time in his
letter dated 13.11.2023. This was followed by several
correspondences apparently to test the veracity of the
claim. The hospital in question being requested to
furnish the documents, responded by stating that the
documents had been lost in the super-cyclone of 1999.
Nonetheless, a specific query was raised as to if the
discharge certificate issued by the hospital at the
relevant time was genuine or not. The hospital
authorities certified that the document is genuine.
Copy of letter dtd.12.3.2025 of the Managing Director
of the hospital addressed to the CDMO and PHO,
Cuttack has been enclosed by the State in its Counter
vide Annexure-G/3. Copy of the discharge report itself
is enclosed to the Writ Petition as Annexure-2, which
clearly reveals that the patient had undergone B/L
tubectomy on 21.10.1998 The discharge report having
been certified as genuine, there is no reason as to why
the claim raised for issue of grant Green Card by the
Petitioner would be turned down.
10. Two grounds have been taken to justify non-
acceptance of the Petitioner's claim. Though no
communication intimating rejection of the claim per se
is available yet from the counter affidavit, it is
discerned that the Petitioner had not voluntarily opted
for tubectomy/vasectomy operation as per resolution
of the Government dtd.19.10.1983 and that despite
being operated in the year 1998, the claim was raised
more than 25 years after, when the scheme had
already been withdrawn.
11. As regards the first ground taken in the counter,
this Court finds that there is absolutely nothing on
record to show that the Petitioner had not undergone
tubectomy voluntarily. The discharge report, which has
been certified as genuine does not say so. Under such
circumstances, this Court fails to understand as to
how such an inference could be drawn by the CDM
and PHO, who, significantly does not claim to have
been involved in the surgical procedure at the relevant
time. When the doctor performing the surgery or the
Medical Officer of the hospital has not even whispered
a word that tubectomy was not voluntarily done, how
the CDM and PHO could arrive at such a conclusion
more than two decades later is surprising indeed.
There is not a shred of evidence to support the plea
raised in the counter, which is therefore, not accepted.
12. As regards the ground of delay in raising the
claim, this Court has perused the relevant guidelines
of the Government issued on 19.10.1983, copy of
which is enclosed as Annexure-1 to the Writ Petition. A
careful reading of the resolution does not reveal any
stipulation of time for raising a claim but only states
the eligibility conditions to be satisfied for issuance of
green card. In fact, the resolution does not speak of
raising any claim. The subsequent resolution
dtd.18.11.1998 also does not say anything at all in this
regard. Therefore, merely because the claim was raised
25 years later, cannot be a ground to reject it. This is
for all the more reason that the claim of the Petitioner
was entertained and duly processed by the authorities
including the CDM & PHO since November, 2023 and
the question of co-called delay was never raised. It is
trite law that a ground not taken at the relevant time
cannot be taken in the counter affidavit for the first
time. The ratio decided in the oft-quoted judgment of
the Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh Gill and
another vs. The Chief Election Commissioner, New
Delhi and others;1 can be referred to in this regard.
13. Coming to the question of withdrawal of the
scheme, it is not disputed that the scheme has been
withdrawn vide Officer order dated 09.11.2012. The
Office order mentions that withdrawal would be with
'immediate effect.' It does not mention anything as
regards the persons who are otherwise eligible under
the resolution dated 19.10.1983. Therefore, the
doctrine of prospectivity can be profitably engaged to
hold that withdrawal of the scheme as per office Order
AIR 1978 SC 851
dtd.9.11.2012 shall have no effect to the persons who
were eligible under the resolution dated 19.10.1983.
Further, there being no time stipulation prescribed in
the resolution dtd.19.10.1983 for raising claim, mere
withdrawal of the scheme cannot operate to nullify the
entitlement of the Petitioner conferred by the said
resolution.
14. On the question of belated approach of the
Petitioner to this Court, it is urged on her behalf that
though eligible she had not applied for issue of Green
Card soon after being operated but the occasion arose
when her daughter sought for admission into the Post
Graduate course in medicine. The claim was raised
before the authorities for the first time on 13.11.2023.
The claim was processed and ultimately the hospital
certified about the genuineness of the discharge report
on 12.3.2025. The Writ Petition was thereafter filed on
25.4.2025 and hence, there is no delay. Learned State
counsel fairly submits that the discharge report was
certified as genuine on 12.3.2025.
15. After considering the above facts and
submissions, this Court is of the view that there being
no time stipulation prescribed in the relevant
Government resolution referred to earlier and the claim
of the Petitioner having been raised and considered
recently, the Writ Petition cannot be said to have been
delayed.
16. Thus, from a conspectus of the facts,
contentions raised and the discussions made, this
Court is of the considered view that the Petitioner is
entitled to be issued with Green Card as per
Government Resolution dtd.19.11.1983. Resultantly,
the Writ Petition is allowed. The Opposite Party-
authorities are directed to issue Green Card in favour
of the Petitioner without any further delay and in any
case, within six weeks from today.
................................
Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR BEHERA Judge
Ashok
Location: High Court of Kumar Behera
Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 19-Nov-2025 10:57:39
