REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL), there were primarily two issues with which this Court was concerned. The first issue was with regard to the mandatory vaccination. By our judgment and order dtd. 23/6/2021, we have dealt with this issue of mandatory vaccination elaborately and nothing remains to be decided in this regard. So far as the other issue is concerned - which was with regard to the method of implementation of the Government Welfare Schemes meant for the marginalised sec. of the society in the State of Meghalaya - we had issued certain directions upon the Secretaries of the various District Legal Service Authority in our judgment and order dtd. 23/6/2021. Such directions were extended from time to time and the final extension was granted by this Court in terms of our earlier order dtd. 9/8/2021. We are now informed by the Registry that the Secretaries of the District Legal Services Authorities have prepared extensive reports; a summary whereof shall be forwarded by the Registry to the learned Advocate General and the concerned authority of the State of Meghalaya so that they can respond to the same on the next date. The extensive detailed reports, which are also on record, can be inspected by the learned Advocate General and/or the concerned authority of the State, upon prior notice to the Registry.

(2.) Before we adjourn this matter, one observation is required to be made in respect of the vaccination policy presently adopted by the State of Meghalaya. In some places in the State of Meghalaya and particularly in remote villages, there are eligible persons who cannot be vaccinated simply because they do not possess any AADHAAR Card. We would request the State not to insist on production of AADHAAR Card as the only proof of identity since there are other recognised options available to citizens of India to present their proofs of identity.

(3.) List this matter after four weeks for further consideration.