Delhi High Court Directs Expedited Implementation of PM-ABHIM Scheme: Mandates MoU Signing to Ensure Pandemic-Resilient Healthcare and Avoid Depriving Delhi Residents

Court’s Decision

The Delhi High Court ordered that a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) and the Government of NCT Delhi (GNCTD) must be signed by January 5, 2025, to facilitate the full implementation of the PM-ABHIM Scheme in Delhi. The court stated unequivocally, “The non-implementation of the PM-ABHIM Scheme in Delhi, when 33 States and UTs have already implemented the same, would not be justified.” The MoU is to be signed irrespective of the Model Code of Conduct or other constraints.

The court further directed that representations regarding the Health Management Information System (HMIS) by the National Informatics Centre (NIC) and C-DAC should be submitted in a PowerPoint format by January 10, 2025.

Facts

1. The PM-ABHIM Scheme, a centrally sponsored initiative to develop pandemic-resilient healthcare infrastructure, was being implemented only on a pilot basis in Delhi, specifically at diagnostic labs in Indira Gandhi Hospital.
2. Minutes of meetings between the Delhi State Health Mission and the National Health Mission revealed discussions regarding the scheme’s execution but highlighted delays in signing the required MoU.
3. The absence of the MoU put Delhi at risk of losing its allocated funds for the scheme, as other states and Union Territories (UTs) had already implemented it.

Issues

1. Should Delhi implement the PM-ABHIM Scheme in its entirety to avoid forfeiting allocated funds?
2. Can the signing of the MoU be mandated despite potential political constraints, such as the Model Code of Conduct?

Petitioner’s Arguments

Not applicable, as the case was initiated suo motu (by the court itself).

Respondent’s Arguments

1. Delhi Government’s Argument:
   • Delhi’s Additional Standing Counsel suggested diverting PM-ABHIM funds to develop infrastructure in hospitals (greenfield and brownfield projects) awaiting inauguration due to a lack of funds.
2. Central Government’s Response:
   • The MoHFW representatives clarified that such a diversion would contravene the scheme’s purpose, which is to build infrastructure specifically for pandemic resilience.

Analysis of the Law

The court examined the guidelines of the PM-ABHIM Scheme, which explicitly aim to strengthen healthcare systems to counter future pandemics. It concluded that the scheme’s objective required full and immediate implementation. The court also upheld the need for inter-governmental agreements, such as the MoU, as a prerequisite for accessing allocated funds.

The court ruled against alternative uses for these funds, emphasizing that such proposals would undermine the scheme’s intent and deprive Delhi’s residents of its benefits.

Precedent Analysis

The judgment did not cite specific precedents but relied on fundamental principles of administrative accountability and the equitable distribution of central funds to states and UTs. It reinforced the judiciary’s role in ensuring the proper implementation of welfare schemes.

Court’s Reasoning

1. The court emphasized the urgency and importance of implementing the PM-ABHIM Scheme in Delhi.
2. It highlighted the inequity of Delhi being the only jurisdiction not to implement the scheme, stating that this would deprive its residents of pandemic-resilient healthcare infrastructure.
3. The court noted that reallocating the scheme’s funds to other projects, as suggested by the Delhi government, would violate its purpose.
4. It mandated that the MoU be signed by January 5, 2025, and rejected the argument that the Model Code of Conduct could delay its execution, as the matter was court-monitored and for public benefit.

Conclusion

The court directed:

1. The MoU between MoHFW and GNCTD must be signed by January 5, 2025.
2. Representations from NIC and C-DAC regarding the proposed HMIS should be submitted by January 10, 2025, in a PowerPoint format.
3. Further monitoring and review of these steps would continue on subsequent hearing dates.

The court stressed that public welfare initiatives like the PM-ABHIM Scheme must be executed without unnecessary delays, ensuring that Delhi does not lose its allocated funds or deprive its residents of essential healthcare infrastructure.

Implications

1. Healthcare Development:
   • Ensures the development of pandemic-resilient healthcare infrastructure in Delhi, aligning it with other states and UTs.
   • Promotes accountability in fund utilization and project execution.
2. Judicial Oversight:
   • Highlights the judiciary’s proactive role in supervising the timely implementation of public welfare schemes.
   • Sets a precedent for strict adherence to scheme guidelines and objectives.
3. Administrative Accountability:
   • Reinforces the principle that governmental bodies must avoid delays and excuses, especially in matters concerning public welfare.
   • Clarifies the judiciary’s stance on avoiding misuse or misallocation of centrally sponsored funds.

Also Read – Supreme Court Quashes FIR Alleging Forced Miscarriage and Cruelty Against Parents-in-Law: “Vague Allegations Without Specific Evidence Cannot Sustain Charges Under Sections 498-A, 312, and 313 IPC”