The high court has directed Punjab and Haryana to produce the annual reports of state mental healthcare authorities.
The directions were passed in a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Pushpanjali Trust, a welfare society seeking implementation of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 that provides for availability of basic and emergency mental healthcare services at all community centres in the state, budgetary provisions for effective implementation, establishment of half-way homes and group homes, educational and training programmes for the education of persons with mental illness.
“We may also indicate that the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, is an important legislation which is required to be implemented by the concerned authorities of the central government as well as state governments in accordance with the provisions contained in the Act. We reiterate that due sensitivity on the part of the officials of the state would be required for implementing the provisions incorporated in the parliamentary legislation. We expect the state authorities to be more careful in ensuring compliance of the legislation,” the bench of chief justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and justice Rohit Kapoor observed while passing these directions.
The Punjab government had submitted that the rules to be framed under the law have been approved by the Central government, but they are yet to be notified, as the rules are required to be placed before the legislature.
However, the court pointed out that the law clearly manifests that after obtaining of approval from the Central government, the rule would have to be notified and thereafter the rule so made shall be placed before the appropriate legislature. “It is, therefore, that the affidavit filed by the chief secretary is in the teeth of the statutory provisions,” the court remarked referring to the affidavit from the state that said rules have to be notified only after same are placed before the state assembly.
{{/usCountry}}However, the court pointed out that the law clearly manifests that after obtaining of approval from the Central government, the rule would have to be notified and thereafter the rule so made shall be placed before the appropriate legislature. “It is, therefore, that the affidavit filed by the chief secretary is in the teeth of the statutory provisions,” the court remarked referring to the affidavit from the state that said rules have to be notified only after same are placed before the state assembly.
{{/usCountry}}“It transpires that though respective steps have been taken under the Act but its provisions have not been implemented in letter and spirit, as the formation of state authority in terms of Section 45 has remained a matter of empty formality,” it said adding that the law provides for the formation of the state Authority as well as manner of filling of vacancies and the functions of the authority. Further it provides for the preparation of annual report by the state.
While posting the matter for further hearing on October 5, it also directed that both the states and the Chandigarh administration to ensure that all necessary institutions contemplated under the Act are made functional, so that the authorities constituted are able to effectively discharge the statutory obligations cast upon them and ensure availability of effective mental healthcare to the citizens.