Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Sunday, November 24, 2024

High Court Should Avoid Passing Orders Which Are Difficult To Implement:

Posted in: medico Legal
Wed, May 26, 21, 12:00, 4 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 5844
Uttar Pradesh vs In Re: Inhuman Condition At Quarantine Centres And For Providing Better Treatment To Corona Positive upgrading the medical facilities in the state of Uttar Pradesh on a war-scale footing

In a fine, favourable, fantastic and fortunate development, the Supreme Court just recently in a brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment titled State of Uttar Pradesh vs In Re: Inhuman Condition At Quarantine Centres And For Providing Better Treatment To Corona Positive in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7147/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17-05-2021 in PIL No. 574/2020 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad) delivered on 21-05-2021 stayed the slew of directions issued by the Allahabad High Court on May 17, 2021 for upgrading the medical facilities in the state of Uttar Pradesh on a war-scale footing. It must be mentioned here that a vacation Bench of Apex Court comprising of Justice Vineet Saran and Justice BR Gavai stayed the Allahabad High Court order delivered by a Division Bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Ajit Kumar of the Allahabad High Court after hearing the submissions made by Solicitor General of India - Tushar Mehta on behalf of the State of Uttar Pradesh. While staying the Allahabad High Court's order of May 17, the Supreme Court clarified that it is not staying the sup motu proceedings taken by the Allahabad High Coury to deal with COVID-19 issues.

To start with, the ball is set rolling in the opening para of this extremely laudable judgment wherein it is put forth that:
This petition has bee n filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh challenging the order dated 17.05.2021 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court in Public Interest Litigation No. 574 of 2020 in Re: Inhuman condition of Quarantine Centres and for providing better treatment to corona positive.

Needless to state, it is then stated in the next para that:
At the outset, we may appreciate the efforts made by the High Court of Allahabad as well as various other High Courts in taking up the matters relating to management of COVID-19 in different parts of the country. The initiative in this regard by various High Courts is laudable. However , while dealing with such matters, because of the concern and anxiety which the courts may have for the corona patients and the general public, and in an endeavour to grant utmost relief to those suffering, sometimes unwittingly, the Courts overstep and pass certain orders which may not be capable of being implemented.

Mind you, if you read between the lines in the last sentence of the above para, you can easily infer that the Apex Court Bench of Justice Vineet Saran and Justice BR Gavai who have authored this classic, cogent and composed judgment have left no room of doubt to make it crystal clear that in their genuine concern for corona patients and the people, the Courts sometimes overstep and pass those orders which may not be capable of being implemented. This is exactly what the Courts must guard themselves always from while delivering judgments on such key issues.

To put things in perspective, the Bench then brings out in the next para that, In the present case, the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 17.05.2021. According to Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General appearing for the State of U.P., howsoever much the State may be desirous of implementing the directions issued by the High Court, the same are incapable of being implemented. As an example, learned SG has brought to our notice the direction as has been issued in paragraph 18 of the said order that every 'B' Grade and 'C' Grade town of the State should be provided with at least 20 ambulances, and further that every village should be provided with at least 2 2 ambulances having Intensive Care Unit facilities, and the same should be done within one month. Learned SG has submitted that there are over 97000 villages in the State of U.P. and it is practically and humanly impossible to provide two ambulances with such facilities in each village in the entire State in such a short period. Learned SG has stated that the endeavour of the State is to provide as many facilities as possible and they are prepared to work in that direction but the order issued to that effect which cannot be implemented would cause embarrassment to the State Government and officers who may not be able to implement the same and could be hauled up by the Court.

Going forward, the Bench then points out in the next para that:
Another example which the learned SG has placed before us is in paragraph 17, whereby it has been directed that all nursing homes in the State should have oxygen facility on every bed, and nursing homes which have more than 20 beds should have at least 40 per cent beds as intensive Care Units and of the designated 40 percent, 25 per cent should have ventilators, 25 per cent should have High Flow Nasal Camila and 50 per cent of the 40 per cent reserved beds should have bipap machines, which should be compulsory for all the nursing homes/hospitals in the State. Another direction pointed out is that all the 5 medical colleges in the State be upgraded at the level of Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute, Lucknow within a period of four months, and if necessary, emergency laws should be applied for the acquisition of land for them. Learned SG submits that it is practically not feasible to upgrade the medical colleges as postgraduate institutes of the level of Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow especially in such a short period. The further submission is that certain directions/observations have also been made requiring big medical companies to manufacture vaccines after talking formula from just any of the vaccine manufacturers in the world and start producing vaccine, which also, according to learned SG, is incapable of being implemented by the State Government, and may also have national and international ramifications.

Furthermore, the Bench then discloses in the next para that:
Learned SG has also brought to our notice that certain observations have been made with regard to the existing medical facilities in the State and the Court has observed tha the entire medical system of the State pertaining to smaller cities and villages are Ram Bharose, I.e. in the hands of God. According to him, such observations demoralize the spirit of doctors and para medical staff who are working day and night and are trying their level best to take full care of the rising number of corona patients.

Quite pertinently, the Bench then observes that:
In our view, the submission that such observations were not warranted and the same may create panic amongst the citizens of the State and nullify the endeavours of the State Government in doing whatever best they are able to do for control of the pandemic and give relief to the patients, has some force.

Be it noted, the Bench then for the sake of clarity observes that:
These are some of the observations/directions which, in our view, may be well meaning, and may have been passed by the Court in the anxiety for the good of the general public, but since apparently the same are incapable of being implemented, the said directions need to be treated by the State Government only as observations and as advise of the Court, and not directions passed by the Court.

By our passing this order, it would not mean that the State Government is not to work in the direction of providing the facilities to the patients and the citizens of the State which are capable of being implemented as per the guidance of the High Court by order dated 17.05.2021. We hope and trust that the State Government will make every endeavour to provide as many facilities as possible.

Of course, the Bench then hastens to add that:
Be that as it may, it is a normal practice, which is also desirable, that such matters of public importance are dealt with by the Bench presided over by the Chief Justice, but since the constitution of Benches is the prerogative of the Chief Justice, in our view, it would be for the Chief Justice of the High Court to consider such aspect and pass appropriate orders.

Most significantly, what forms the cornerstone of this Learned and judgment is then stated thus as : Further while again appreciating the efforts of the judges of the High Court in looking to the matter in depth while passing orders, we are of the opinion that. the High Court should normally consider the possibility of the implementation of the directions given by it, and such directions which are incapable of being implemented should be avoided. The doctrine of impossibility, in our view, would be equally applicable to Court orders as well.

No less significant is what is then stated in the next para that:
While concluding, we may also mention that in matters which have transnational and international ramifications, the High Court should normally refrain from issuing directions in such matters, especially when such matters of national level are being considered by this Court in separate proceedings.

As a corollary, the Bench then holds in the next para that:
Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, we thus stay the impugned order dated 17.05.2021. While adding more to it, the Bench then observes that:
However, we make it clear that further proceedings before the High Court are not being stayed.

Finally, the Bench then holds that:
We direct that this matter be now listed on 14.07.2021. We appoint Mr. Nidhesh Gupta, learned senior counsel, as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court in this matter. The Registry is directed to supply a copy of this petition to Mr. Nidhesh Gupta within three days.

To conclude, the Apex Court has sought to make it absolutely clear to the High Courts that they should normally refrain from issuing directions in such matters which have transnational and international ramifications as mentioned above! It must also be mentioned that the UP CM Yogi Adityanath is getting lavish praise not just from national organisations but also from most reputed international organisations like World Health Organisation (WHO) and UN among others which clearly manifests that Yogi is doing a commendable job which cannot and should not be discounted! It is the bounden duty of the High Courts to strictly abide by what the top court has held in this leading case so eloquently, effectively and elegantly! The earlier they realise this, the better it shall be!

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
In 1929 Parliament perceived the need to qualify the child destruction. statute by a provision for preserving the life of the mother, but crassly failed to add a similar exception to the abortion section In 1861
When the Abortion Bill came before the House of Lords, much attention was given to this question.
Formerly it was thought that the vital point of time was fertilisation, the fusior of spermatozoon and ovum, but it is now realised
the paper intends to highlight the need for a concrete legal framework in reference to the recent developments to protect the rights of parties involved in the commercial surrogacy.
This article deals with the introduction of corona virus and it's legal aspects & some laws related to it in India.
incidents of manhandling of Covid patients/dead bodies. What is even more tragic to learn is that this is happening more with those patients who are not able to cough up huge astronomical sum of money as demanded by the hospitals where they are admitted
Ganta Jai Kumar v/s Telangana a medical emergency is not an excuse to trample on the fundamental rights of a citizen under Article 21 of the Constitution.
dehumanizing treatment of the Covid-19 patients and dead bodies in the hospitals etc after watching it live in India TV news channel as also other news channels especially of LNJP hospital in Delhi which has shaken the whole country beyond belief.
Supreme Court went ahead to allow a woman bearing 25 weeks old twin pregnancy, to undergo procedure for foetal reduction on the grounds of serious foetal abnormalities
Own Motion vs State Of NCT Of Delhi after taking suo motu cognizance of the grievances faced by a citizen
Abdul Shoeb Shaikh v/s K.J. Somaiya Hospital that a person suffering from Covid-19 who belongs to the economically weaker section of the society cannot be expected to produce documentary proof before seeking admission in a hospital for free treatment
Ketan Tirodkar v/s Maharashtra dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) alleging negligence in management of dead bodies of Covid-19 victims by Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Karnajit De vs. Tripura Doctors are the first line defence of the country in the fight against the corona virus. It directed the Government to restore the confidence of the Doctors and para-medical staff and all concerned who are sacrificing their lives to fight against the pandemic.
Medipol Pharmaceutical India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research considerable unexplained delay on the part of drug authorities to test a sample can render any penalty under Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, based upon the said analysis of the sample as void.
Bikash Duria vs State of Orissa Instances of drug abuse is required to be dealt with a strict hard on Crime attitude. It was made clear that the NDPS cases should always be dealt with stricter approach of No Tolerance
Own Motion Vs. UOI safety issues faced by the general public due to the non-availability of ventilators and oxygenated beds for Coronavirus patients with moderate and severe conditions in order to reduce the death rate in Nagpur.
Jeet Ram vs. Narcotics Control Bureau Section 50 of the NDPS Act is applicable only in the case of personal search. This the Supreme Court has reiterated unambiguously while affirming the conviction of an accused who was a temple priest.
Hemant Kumar Vs Himachal Pradesh A medical officer who remains willfully absent from duty, is guilty of mis-conduct and punishment of dismissal from service cannot be said to be a harsh punishment.
RM Arun Swaminathan Vs The Principal Secretary to the Government if the autopsy reports are prepared in a shabby and unscientific manner and without actual performance of autopsies by doctors, it will lead to collapse of criminal justice delivery system in the country.
Tofan Singh vs Tamil Nadu by a 2:1 majority with Justice Indira Banerjee dissenting that officers of the Central and State agencies appointed under Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act
VetIndia Pharmaceuticals Limited vs. Uttar Pradesh set aside an indefinite blacklisting order issued in the year 2009 against VetIndia Pharmaceuticals Limited.
We all keep hearing the old adages like Where woman is worshipped, God resides there and When you educate a man you educate an individual but when you educate a woman you educate the entire family so on
Dr AKB Sadbhavana Mission School Of Homeo Pharmacy vs The Secretary, Ministry Of AYUSH has minced no words to clarify that homeopathy can be used in preventing and mitigating Covid-19 as per AYUSH ministry guidelines. Thus some observations made by the Kerala High Court were modified on this score
To Curb The Increasing Menace Of Drug Abuse vs Kerala directions to control drug abuse among youngsters and students in educational institutions.
Gurdev Singh v/s Punjab quantity of narcotic substance is a relevant factor that can be taken into account for imposing higher than the minimum punishment under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Patan Jamal Vali vs Andhra Pradesh taken the bold initiative to issue guidelines to make criminal justice system more disabled friendly.
Vivek Sheel Aggarwal vs UOI It is not for the Court to render advice much less issue directions to the Government on the line of treatment that is required to be followed for COVID
Tripura, Agartala v. UOI, wherein it has directed the Central Government, Ministry of Home Affairs to take appropriate steps for amending Section 27A of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 without further delay.
Sonu Bairwa Vs State of MP & Ors black marketing of remdesivir injection has direct impact on public order, and the petitioner-accused if released, could indulge into same activity because the scarcity of remdesivir is still there.
Not permitting a rape victim, suffering from severe mental problems, to undergo Medical Termination of unwarranted pregnancy would be violative of her bodily integrity which would not only aggravate her mental trauma but would also have devastating effect on her overall health including on psychological and mental aspects.
Jose Luis Quintanilla Sacristan vs UP since a report of State Forensic Science Laboratory is admissible in evidence (as per the provision of Section 293 CrPC), therefore, there is no requirement to call the Director of that laboratory to get the same proved.
Radhakrishna Pillai v. District Level Authorization Committee for transplantation of Human Organs, Ernakulam criminal antecedents of a person cannot be criteria when it comes to organ donation and the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 do not make any such distinction against persons with criminal record.
doctors themselves as also the hospital staff are themselves not safe in our country and are abused, attacked and assaulted by some disgruntled attendants of patients
Ashok Kumar vs Raj Gupta that forcing an unwilling party to undergo DNA test impinges on personal liberty and right to privacy.
Aryan Khan left his home in Mumbai's Bandra to attend a party on board Cordelia Cruises' Empress ship. A two-day 'musical voyage' had been organized by a Delhi-based events company.
Dr.P Basumani vs The Tamil Nadu Medical Council the Madras High Court quashed an order dated May 4, 2021 of the Tamil Nadu Medical Council (TNMC) suspending a gastroenterologist by observing that principles of natural justice were not given credence to.
All India Kamgar General Union vs Union of India Delhi High Court has issued detailed directives to Central Government Hospitals to ensure that no improper and corrupt practices are indulged in by the contractors in respect of engagement of contractual workmen.
Jasmeet Singh Hakimzada vs National Investigation Agency refused to quash an NIA case against Jasmeet Singh Hakimzada, who is allegedly a Dubai-based international drug smuggler, by taking into account the allegations against him of reviving terrorism in the State of Punjab
Mohd Zahid vs State through NCB discretion to direct subsequent sentence to run concurrently with the previous sentence has to be exercised judiciously depending upon the nature of offences committed.
PD Gupta vs Delhi it expects a little more sensitivity from the Delhi Government when it is dealing with claims for reimbursement of medical expenses of senior citizens who are their own retired employees.
Sandeep Kumar v. Punjab Police on their knuckles for their callously casual approach towards their official duty even when the drug menace has become a deep-rooted in the state of Punjab.
Dr. (Mrs.) Chanda Rani Akhouri Vs Dr MA Methusethupathi in exercise of its civil appellate jurisdiction delivered as recently as on April 20, 2022 has laid down in no uncertain terms that merely because doctors could not save the patient
The National Medical Commission vs Pooja Thandu Naresh that the National Medical Commission is not bound to grant provisional registration to the student who has not completed the entire duration of the course from the Foreign Institute including the clinical training.
Aravinth RA vs Secretary To Government Of India Ministry Of Health upheld the validity of Regulations 4(a)(ii), 4(b) & 4(c) of the National Medical Commission (Foreign Medical Graduate Licentiate) Regulations 2021, Schedule II 2(a) and 2(c)(i) of the National Medical Commission
State v. Sheikh Sehzad has released an accused charged under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act on interim bail while observing that every millisecond of unnecessary detention makes a substantial difference and tantamount to an unwarranted interference with the rights of the accused.
Mohan Singh vs UP allowed the conduct of DNA test in a murder trial as it noted that the same was in the interests of justice to unearth the truthfulness of the prosecution's case.
Farooq Ahmad Bhat Vs Syed Basharat Saleem that before prosecuting medical professionals for the offence of criminal negligence, a Criminal Court should obtain opinion of the medical expert
Inayath Ali v/s Telangana allowing DNA testing to determine the paternity of two children to verify a claim made by their mother that she had been forced to cohabit and develop a physical relationship with her brother-in-law.
Davinder Singh Vs Punjab that the drug peddlers have successfully destroyed the social fabric of society and led youth to the wrongful path.
Top