D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.278/2008 Smt. Jannat Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Judgment :: April 02, 2008. HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Mohammad Anees for the appellant. *** Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Delay in filing this appeal is condoned. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26.2.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition no.07/2007 dismissing the writ petition of the appellant. The appellant filed the above-referred to writ petition with the prayer that the respondents may be directed to pay to her a sum of Rs.5.00 lacs as compensation on account of the additional liability fastened upon her for maintaining the eighth unwanted child. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the writ petitioner-appellant had undergone the family planning operation in P.H.C. Chauru, Tehsil Fagi, District Jaipur on 01.2.1999, which was conducted by the respondent no.4, Dr. O.P. Sharma, Medical Officer In-charge of the P.H.C. It is however submitted that despite the said operation, the appellant gave birth to the eighth child; and this has happened due to negligence and carelessness on the part of the respondent no.4. -2- Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant perused the impugned judgment and other materials forming part of this appeal, we find that whether or not the respondent no.4 was negligent in discharge of duties and due to which additional liability of maintaining the eighth child has fallen upon the writ petitioner, is a question of fact. The Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab Vs. Shiv Ram & Ors. reported in JT 2005(7) SC 606 has held that it is a matter to be examined on evidence whether there was any negligence or not and such matter cannot be decided in the scope of writ jurisdiction. In the light of the aforesaid authoritative pronouncement by the Supreme Court, we are afraid, the kind of controversy that has been raised in this appeal cannot be adjudicated upon in the scope of writ jurisdiction. The writ petitioner-appelalnt, in these circumstances, may approach the appropriate civil court for claiming damages after proving the negligence on the part of the respondent no.4. We, therefore, do not find any error in the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. This appeal is dismissed being devoid of merits. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J. (NARAYAN ROY),CJ. Skant/-