- (1.)In pursuance of our earlier order, affidavits by certain States have been filed and certain States, by adopting a lackadaisical attitude, have not filed the affidavits. The States, namely, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar, Goa, Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Orissa, Tripura, and UT of Daman and Nagar Haveli and Puducherry have not filed the affidavits. This attitude is not appreciated. However, they shall file their respective affidavits within two weeks hence.
(2.)As advised at present, we are inclined to think that the suggestions we had recorded in our previous order shall be adverted to in respect of cluster of States first. To elaborate, we shall deal with the problem that has occurred by dividing the States into certain clusters. Presently, we have decided to deal with the controversy pertaining to the States of Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and NCT of Delhi.
(3.)On a perusal of the affidavit of the State of Uttar Pradesh, we find that the affidavit is absolutely non-informative from all corners. A census chart of 2011 has been filed. We are absolutely unimpressed by the chart given during the census conducted in 2011 relating to the sex ratio that cannot be the guideline for the purposes of PC-PNDT Act. There has to be a different methodology to be adopted by the State. We would be failing in our duty if we do not refer to para 28 of the affidavit. It reads as follows :
"28. That it is pertinent to mention herein that according to "ANNUAL HEALTH SURVEY (AHS)" for the year 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13, improvement has been revealed in the State in respect of Sex Ratio At Birth, Sex Ratio of Child (0 to 04 years age) and Sex Ratio in all age group, which is clear with the table given below:

JUDGEMENT_103_LAWS(SC)11_2014.jpg