Orissa HC dismisses PIL for PMJAY implementation

However, the bench gave the petitioner liberty to approach the court again after complying with the rule.
Representative Image.
Representative Image.

CUTTACK : The Orissa High Court on Tuesday dismissed a PIL seeking implementation of the Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PMJAY) in the state stating it is not maintainable as the petitioner had not complied with Rule 8 of the Orissa High Court PIL Rules 2010.

The petition was filed by former state BJP president Samir Mohanty on February 2. It alleged that common people were being deprived of a wide range of medical facilities and services due to non-implementation of the scheme in the state.

However, when the petition came up for hearing, advocate general Ashok Kumar Parija raised objection submitting that the PIL is not maintainable as the petitioner had not complied with Rule 8 of Orissa High Court PIL Rules 2010. PMJAY, a national insurance scheme under the flagship programme Ayushman Bharat was launched on September 29, 2018.

Parrying the court’s query on compliance of Rule 8, senior advocate representing Mohanty cited para 6 of the petition which said, “By now it is an established fact that despite several requests of the Government of India, the state government is not implementing the PMJAY. Further since the matter involves the health of the people of the state of Odisha at large, it requires immediate intervention of this court, the petitioner has straight way knocked at the doors of this court in shape of the public interest litigation seeking speedy and efficacious remedy.”

The court was, however, not impressed. The division bench of Chief Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh and Justice Arindam Sinha said, “We are satisfied that the relief the petitioner is seeking in the present PIL is not of such urgent nature that requires the court to maintain the writ application even without complying with the requirement of approaching the state in accordance with Rule 8 of the Orissa High Court PIL Rules 2010.”

“In our considered opinion this writ application, in its present form, cannot be maintained and is accordingly dismissed,” the bench observed.

However, the bench gave the petitioner liberty to approach the court again after complying with the rule. The Rule 8 stipulates that before filing a PIL, the petitioner must send a representation to the authorities concerned for taking remedial action. Details of such representation and reply, if any, from the authority concerned along with copies thereof must be filed with the petition.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com