Back
2020 Supreme(Del) 970
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prateek Jalan, J.
Gaurav Kumar Bansal - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. - Respondent
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 7795 of 2020
Decided On : 12-10-2020
Vikas Mahajan, Advocate, Jatin Puniyani, Advocate, Anjum Javed, Advocate, Tushar Sannu, Advocate, Ankita Bhadouriya, Advocate
The court has the authority to direct the respondents to take necessary action in accordance with the law to address grievances related to the provisions of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017.
Headnote:
Minimum Standards - Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 - The court directed the respondents to treat the writ petition as a representation and take necessary action in accordance with the law to finalize the draft of minimum standards for different categories of mental health establishments as provided under Section 65(6) of the Act, 2017.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought the issuance of minimum standards for different categories of mental health establishments as provided under Section 65(6) of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondents to treat the writ petition as a representation and take necessary action to finalize the draft of minimum standards for mental health establishments in accordance with the law, rules, regulations, and government policies.
Issues: The main issue pertained to the provisions of Section 65(6) of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 and the petitioner's request for the issuance of minimum standards for mental health establishments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the provisions of Section 65(6) of the Act, 2017 and directed the respondents to take necessary action to finalize the draft of minimum standards for mental health establishments.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with the direction to the respondents to treat it as a representation and take necessary action to finalize the draft of minimum standards for mental health establishments.
JUDGMENT
D. N. Patel, C.J. - Proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.
1. This public interest litigation has been preferred with the following prayers:-
"A. Issue Writ / Order / Direction in the nature of Mandamus against Respondents and in particular Respondent No. 02 and Respondent No. 04 to issue notification specifying the MINIMUM STANDARDS for different categories of MENTAL HEALTH ESTABLISHMENTS as provided under Section 65(6) of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017.
B. Issue a Writ/Order/Direction in the nature of mandamus against respondents and in particular Respondent No.1 to issue REGULATIONS with respect to manner of making ADVANCE DIRECTIVES as provided under Section 06 of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017.
C. Pass any other Order or Direction which this Hon''ble Court may deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances as mentioned above."
2. Having heard the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents, it appears that the grievances ventilated in this petition pertain to the provisions of Section 65(6) of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 (hereinafter, "the Act, 2017"). The petitioner is mainly seeking issuance of "Minimum Standards for Different Categories of Mental Health Establishment" as provided under Section 65(6) of the Act, 2017.
3. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the respondents have already prepared a draft in this regard which is at the final stage of approval, and the same will be published immediately once finalized.
4. In view of these facts, and keeping in mind the provisions of Section 65(6) of the Act, 2017, at this stage, we hereby direct the respondents to treat this writ petition as a representation and take necessary action in accordance with law, rules, regulations and Government policies applicable to the facts of the case as expeditiously as possible and practical.
5. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
