Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
D.N.PATEL, JYOTI SINGH
Shivleen Pasricha – Appellant
Versus
State (National Capital Territory of Delhi) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. public interest litigation for regulating hrct test prices (Para 1) |
| 2. variability of hrct test rates in private hospitals (Para 2) |
| 3. court's directive for treating petition as representation (Para 3) |
| 4. writ petition disposed with directions (Para 4) |
ORDER
Proceedings have been conducted through video conferencing.
1. This public interest litigation has been preferred for the following reliefs:
"(a) Issue appropriate writ(s), order(s) and/or direction(s) in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate nature, directing the Respondents to take appropriate steps to regulate/cap the rate of High-Resolution Computerised Tomography ('HRCT') test/scan in the State of National Capital Territory of Delhi, specifically for patients having COVID-19 symptoms, in the interest of justice; and
(b) Pass any other and/or further necessary order(s) and/or direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, proper and necessary, in the interest of justice."
2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the price/rate of the High-Resolution Computerised Tomography Test (hereinafter referred as 'HRCT Test') has been recently capped in the Government hospitals at De
The main legal point established is the requirement for negotiation with private laboratories and consideration of overhead expenses in rate fixation, in line with ICMR guidelines and principles of f....
The court opined that to prevent multiplicity of litigation, a writ petitioner may file an application in an existing case involving similar issues.
The court ruled that patients with COVID-19 symptoms must be admitted without RT-PCR test results, emphasizing the importance of following health directives and improving testing infrastructure.
A public interest litigation is rendered infructuous when the reliefs sought have been effectively addressed by relevant authorities.
The right to health includes access to necessary testing for infections, and arbitrary restrictions on testing undermine this fundamental right.
The court may dispose of a petition as infructuous if the reliefs sought have already been addressed.
The court's discretion to dispose of a petition based on the lack of reason to keep it pending.
The court emphasized the necessity for timely responses from the State Government regarding health emergency communications and the effective management of Covid-19 resources.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
