ROSEMARY DZUVICHU Vs. STATE OF NAGALAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. K. Kikhi, learned counsel who appeared for the petitioners in all the P.I.Ls. Also heard Ms. V. Suokhrie, learned Addl. Sr. Government Advocate for the State respondents in all the P.I.Ls, Mr. N. Mozhui, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 in all the P.I.Ls except in P.I.L No. 9(K) of 2015, and Mr. A. Zhimomi, learned counsel for the State respondents in P.I.L No. 9(K) of 2015. We have also heard Mr. Z.N. Ngullie, learned CGC who appeared on behalf of Union of India in P.I.L No. 7(K) of 2016, P.I.L. No. 12(K) of 2016, and P.I.L. No. 10(K) of 2016, and Mr. Yangerwati, learned CGC who also appeared on behalf of the Union of India where Mr. Z.N. Ngullie has not entered appearance.

(2.) The PILs are concerning maintenance of public health standard, addressing of the issues of maternal and infant mortality and implementation of government schemes relating to public health, women and child in particular, improvement of infrastructures like, construction of health centre buildings, providing of equipments, man-power, ambulances and also for providing of medicines etc.

(3.) At the very outset Mr. Zhimomi, learned counsel who appears on behalf of the respondent No. 1,2 and 3, in PE. No. 9(K) of 2015, raised a preliminary objection on behalf of the respondents by stating that the petitioner has not complied with the requirement of Rule 10(g) of the Gauhati High Court (Public Interest Litigation) Rules, 2011, and since these rule was framed under the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is mandatory in nature. Therefore, the PILs has to be dismissed for non-compliance of the said rule.