Maternal death due to the poor implementation of maternal health schemes, absence of ante-natal care, a broken referral system and substandard medical treatment in the District Hospital of Dimapur
Shri Chemkai Konyak versus State of Nagaland & Ors. W.P(C) No. 167 (K) of 2016, The Gauhati High Court, Kohima Bench Synopsis: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in the matter of maternal death of the petitioner’s wife, Late Ramyile Teriang. The writ petition demands justice for the tragic death due to the poor implementation of maternal health schemes, absence of ante-natal care, a broken referral system and substandard medical treatment in the District Hospital of Dimapur. Also, in the matter of medical negligence and non-monitoring of services under The Nagaland Health Care Establishment Act, 1997 and Nagaland Medical Council Act, 2014 and failing to conduct Maternal Death Review (MDR). The petitioner seeks to ensure that no woman succumbs to a preventable maternal death in Nagaland, proper and effective implementation of the governmental schemes like Janani Shishu Suraksha Karyakaram (JSSK), other maternal health schemes and entitlements and prays for appropriate compensation to be provide to the victim and family, when the maternal death was due to the callousness caused by government aided hospital. This petition also seeks for the intervention of the Nagaland Health Care Establishment Authority to look into the matter, who is also a party respondent in the petition. Status: Case is pending still in the court. No counter affidavit has been filed by the state respondent or the private hospital (private party) in the present case. The Spot verification of the Deputy Commissioner has been place on record as directed by the court. Description: Background and Development of the case: In March 2016, a team of activists had conducted a fact finding mission concerning maternal deaths that had occurred in Dimapur District of Nagaland, India. The team was called upon to the deceased’s family to conduct interview. The petitioner’s wife who was about 29 (twenty nine) years of age was a very prospective and industrious person, who was very central to the future plans of her paternal family and her husband’s family. She was inducted into State Government Service in the Month of May, 2012 as a Hindi Teacher at Primary School level, earning a monthly income of Rs. 24,791 /-.The interviews was intended to elicit a first-hand account of the deceased woman’s background, child-bearing history, pregnancy, delivery and the events surrounding her death. More specifically, the interview was intended to assess whether the numerous schemes such as IPHS, JSY, JSSK etc. were being implemented on the ground and to study into medical negligence on the part of the Private Hospital i.e. Nikos Hospital. The comprehensive study of the case shows that the series of violations of schemes and basic health care guaranteed to the deceased under the Constitution of India, ultimately led to the untimely death of a young and industrious woman. Respondent 1: The State of Nagaland, Represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, no counter affidavit filed. Respondent 2: The Mission Director, National Rural Health Mission, no counter affidavit filed Respondent 3: The Chief Medical Officer, Dimapur, counter yet to be filed . Respondent 4: Medical Superintendent, Dimapur District Hospital, counter affidavit to be filed. Respondent 5: The Respondent 6: The Managing Director, M/S NIKOS Hospital Research Centre, Dimapur, No response or counter filed. Respondent 6: The Nagaland HealthCare Establishment Authority, through its Chairman, the Secretary of Health and Family Welfare, no counter filed till date. Respondent 7: The Nagaland Medical Council, through its President, response yet to be filed. Respondent 8: Deputy Commissioner of Dimapur (impleaded as party respondent by the court) Spot verification of District Hospital Dimapur filed. Affidavit in reply, to the report of Deputy Commissioner, to be filed by the petitioner.