Meghalaya HC directs Institute of Human Reproduction, Guwahati to constitute a medical board on treatment of 50-yr-old woman

Syllad | The Rising MeghalayaJanuary 27, 2025

The Meghalaya High Court on Monday directed the Institute of Human Reproduction, Guwahati, Assam to comply with its order for constituting a medical board to decide on whether a 50-year-old woman could receive treatment through the assisted reproductive technology.

In its order passed after hearing a petition on the matter, the bench comprising Chief Justice IP Mukerji and Justice W Diengdoh said, “The hospital is directed to constitute the medical board as directed by our order dated 17th December, 2024 forthwith.”

The petitioner Silbania Lyngdoh in her writ petition wanted the Court to declare a portion of the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021 as invalid. That portion of the Act does not allow a woman of over 50 years of age to avail of the technology. The petitioner is just over 50 years of age and wants to avail of it.

On December 17, 2024, the Court had directed the Institute of Human Reproduction, Guwahati to constitute a medical board which was directed to file a report as to whether the petitioner could receive the treatment. The Central and State governments were asked to take instructions in the matter.

“We have been shown a letter dated 18th January, 2025 by the Medical Superintendent of the Institute of Human Reproduction, Bharalumukh, Guwahati where he has stated that since “no certified copy or notice of appearance or writ petition copy has been received from the Hon’ble Court of law…we are unable to process your request at this stage.” 

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by a letter dated 11th January 2025, the necessary details and a copy of the order dated 17th December, 2024 passed by us were duly sent to the hospital. However, he has been unable to file an affidavit of service evidencing the above submission,” the bench said adding “We would like to state in clear terms that the documents mentioned in the letter of the Medical Superintendent dated 18th January, 2025 are not sent by the Court but served by the party upon the person or authority concerned for compliance, unless the Court specifically directs its Registry to transmit a copy of the order. The latter direction was not made in this case. Hence, on the basis of the copy of the order, if served by the learned Advocate for the petitioner on the hospital, the hospital ought to have complied with our order.”

“In any case, all orders of this Court are uploaded in its website and if the hospital had an intention to comply with it, it could have verified the order from the website. We do not appreciate this delay caused by the hospital,” the bench further added.

Meanwhile, the counsel for the Union of India and State seek two weeks’ time to seek necessary instructions. The court has decided to adjourn the hearing on the writ petition till February 10.