family members, the petitioner was conducted LSCS with Sterilization
operation. The petitioner also gave undertaking before undergoing the family
planning operation to the effect that ... operation, the
petitioner was made to believe that after the operation, she would not
conceive. Therefore, the act of the medical officer, who conducted
sterilization
opted for sterilization, developed
pregnancy and ultimately gave birth to a female child in
spite of sterilization operation which, obviously, had failed ... operation, the petitioner was made to believe that
after the operation, she would not conceive. Therefore, the act of the
medical officer, who conducted sterilization
present petitions
is whether the pregnancy of the petitioner after the sterilization
operation would entitle the parents for compensation from the
State ... family members for sterilization operation
and thereafter, the said operation was performed by the
doctors but even after the sterilization operation, third child
was born
present petitions
is whether the pregnancy of the petitioner after the sterilization
operation would entitle the parents for compensation from the
State ... family members for sterilization operation
and thereafter, the said operation was performed by the
doctors but even after the sterilization operation, third child
was born
present petitions
is whether the pregnancy of the petitioner after the sterilization
operation would entitle the parents for compensation from the
State ... family members for sterilization operation
and thereafter, the said operation was performed by the
doctors but even after the sterilization operation, third child
was born
respondent - (in short 'the complainant') had undergone family
planning (sterilization) operation by the opposite party No. 1 with the
interest to keep ... conceived, even
after sterilization. It is doubtedly proved that a baby child was born to the
complainant after family planning (sterilization) operation. It is also
that after operation, few cases are unsuccessful. The respondent -
complainant was informed by the appellant at the time of operation that
these sterilization operations sometimes ... doctor. Before the operation, an operation form is taken from
the beneficiary who undergoes the vasectomy operation and respondent -
complainant has given her clear consent
complainant after delivering
a child on 7.11.2009 had underwent a sterilization operation, for
which she had paid Rs.25,000/-. It is alleged that ... aforesaid
sterilization operation was unsuccessful and she again got
pregnant in the year 2013 and delivered a child on 6.7.2014.
The complainant alleged deficiency
that the issue of special pay of Rs. 20/- for
undergoing sterilization operation was considered by this Court in
D.T.C. v. Presiding Officer ... wherein it was held that the „Special Pay‟ for undergoing the
sterilization operation was integral to his wages and could not have
been withheld while
officials along with respondent no.4 who have
conducted the aforesaid sterilization operation.
7.2 That, respondents may kindly be directed to give
compensation ... submitted by counsel for petitioner that petitioner had
undergone a sterilization operation but in spite of that, she has conceived
and, thus, it is clear
