Delhi High Court
Dr Satendra Singh vs Union Of India & Ors. on 3 September, 2020
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 03.09.2020
+ W.P.(C) 5959/2020 & CM APPLs.21527-29/2020
DR SATENDRA SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajshekhar Rao with
Ms.Vrinda Bhandari, Ms.Devdutta
Mukhopadhyay, Ms. Sanjana
Srikumar & Mr. Vinayak Mehrotra,
Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Manish Mohan, CGSC with
Mr. Sameer Sinha, GP &
Ms. Manisha Saroha, Adv. for UOI.
Mr. Shlok Chandra, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
D.N. PATEL, Chief Justice (Oral)
Proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video
conferencing.
CM APPLs.21528/2020 & 21529/2020 (both exemption applications)
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Both the applications stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) 5959/2020 & CM APPL.21527/2020 (stay)
1. This Public Interest Litigation has been preferred with the following
prayers:-
Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ
KUMAR
Location:
Signing Date:04.09.2020
21:22:33
"A. Issue a Declaration that providing fifteen days for a
national consultation for the National Digital Health Mission:
Health Data Management Policy is illegal, arbitrary, and
negates the very object sought to be achieved by the
Respondents;
B. Issue a Declaration that the Notice inviting Consultation
dated 26.08.2020 issued by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 at the
URL
<https://ndhm.gov.in/stakeholder_consultations/ndhm_policies
> is unreasonably short, illegal, null and void;
C. Issue a Declaration that undertaking any online public
consultation process for draft policies or legislation during a
public health emergency/crisis, such as COVID-19, without
providing alternative arrangements for those excluded on
account of language or disability or internet access is illegal
and unconstitutional;
D. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction to the Respondent Nos. 1
and 2 to extend the notice period of the consultation of the
„National Digital Health Mission: Health Data Management
Policy‟ till the restrictions /lockdowns in place under the
Disaster Management Act for COVID-19 pandemic subsist; or
for a minimum period of 60 days;
E. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction to Respondents No. 1 and
2 to provide widespread publicity to „National Digital Health
Mission: Health Data Management Policy‟, including but not
limited through means other than the internet;
F. Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction to the Respondent to make
translated copies of the draft „National Digital Health Mission:
Health Data Management Policy‟ available across the country
in the official vernacular languages mentioned in the Eighth
Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ
KUMAR
Location:
Signing Date:04.09.2020
21:22:33
Schedule to the Constitution, and upload the same on all its
websites, including that of Respondent No. 1 and the National
Digital Health Mission;
G. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction to conduct the
consultations for the „National Digital Health Mission: Health
Data Management Policy‟ in a format that is accessible for
persons with visual impairment and in compliance with the
accessibility requirements under the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities Act, 2016, including but not limited to, by removing
the CAPTCHA requirement and providing an alternative to
submit comments by email;
H. Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction to the Respondent to
conduct consultations and hearings with various stakeholders
and concerned persons across the country, as a precondition to
considering the Draft Policy;"
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the draft 'National
Digital Health Mission: Health Data Management Policy' has been put in
public domain for consultation process. The petitioner seeks extension of the
notice period of the consultation of the aforesaid policy. The time of
consultation process was initially fixed upto 03.09.2020 and later on
extended upto 10.09.2020.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that on various
other grounds also, there is inadequacy in the consultation process.
4. However, it is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that it would
suffice if the representation of the petitioner at 'Annexure P-18', pending
before the concerned respondent authorities, is decided in accordance with
law and the grounds agitated in this petition may be allowed to be raised
Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ
KUMAR
Location:
Signing Date:04.09.2020
21:22:33
when the final policy, if at all, is challenged by the petitioner.
5. In view of these limited submissions, we hereby direct the concerned
respondent authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner, which is
at Annexure P-18 to the memo of this petition, in accordance with law,
rules, regulations and Government policies applicable to the facts of the
case. The respondents will keep in mind the various grounds raised in this
petition while deciding the said representation. The issue of inadequacy of
the consultation process on various grounds is permitted to be raised as and
when such policy is challenged. This Court is not deciding the aforesaid
grounds at this stage, but the same are kept open. As and when the issue will
arise, the same will be decided in accordance with law by this Court.
6. With these observations, this writ petition is hereby disposed of.
The pending application also stands disposed of accordingly.
CHIEF JUSTICE
PRATEEK JALAN, J
SEPTEMBER 3, 2020
kks
Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ
KUMAR
Location:
Signing Date:04.09.2020
21:22:33
