SHOBHA Vs. GOVT NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The opening remarks of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others versus Smt. Santra reported in 2000 (3) Supreme 520 ably apply to the fact-situation prevailing in these two writ petitions. This is what the Supreme Court observed in the beginning of the aforesaid judgment:-

(2.) Civil writ petition no.7715/2001 was heard and judgment reserved. Before this judgment could be pronounced writ petition no.7515 of 2000 came up for hearing on 18th March, 2003. During the arguments it was noticed that the issue involved in this case was identical to the issue involved in the earlier writ petition. In view of this position, both these writ petitions are disposed of by one common judgment. It would be noted that both the cases are dealt with separately however one common judgment is pronounced to avoid repetition regarding discussion on the legal aspects.

(3.) Petitioner who was mother of four children gave birth to unwanted female child on 5th October, 2000. She attributes this to sheer negligence on the part of the respondents as she had undergone tubectomy operation on 23rd February, 1999 and was assured that it was a successful operation and she will not bear any more children. Petitioner alleges that she is a poor lady who belongs to a poor class of labourers and earn meagre amount of Rs.3000/- per month by selling 'jaljeera rehdi' (hawker). She, therefore, claims damages from the respondents in this writ petition.