The Supreme Court has asked the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Ministry to decide on a representation of a person seeking modification of COVID-19 policy to allow voluntary re-vaccination of persons who have received the Sputnik-V vaccine and are desirous of travelling abroad.
A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant while refusing to interfere with the petition granted liberty to the petitioner, Tarun Mehta, to move a representation before the Ministry.
The plea stated that Mehta was vaccinated with the Sputnik-V vaccine, but, since it has not been approved by the World Health Organization, he was unable to travel abroad.
In its order, the apex court noted, "The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking a modification of the Covid-19 vaccination policy. The petitioner states that he was vaccinated with the Sputnik-V vaccine, but, since it has not been approved by the World Health Organisation, he is unable to travel abroad. The petitioner seeks a modification of the policy to allow voluntary revaccination of persons who have received the Sputnik-V vaccine and are desirous of travelling abroad."
The bench stated that the petitioner moved the court without a demand for justice being made before the competent authority.
"The safety and efficacy of the measure require a careful and calibrated scientific assessment. Hence, the petitioner is permitted to highlight the hardship which is being faced by him and perhaps, by similarly placed other individuals, by moving a representation before the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. The petitioner is granted liberty to do so. The MOH & FW is requested to consider it appropriately bearing in mind all relevant aspects with reasonable expedition. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of," the top court in its order said.
The plea has said that Sputnik V has not received an Emergency Use Listing from the WHO and that various countries such as the United States of America, Canada, countries forming the European Union, Japan etc. were treating individuals who have been administered with Sputnik-V as un-vaccinated individuals who were either not being allowed to travel to the said countries or made to undergo mandatory quarantine.
When the petitioner was administered with Sputnik-V, it had been approved by the government and thus, he legitimately and bonafidely believed that the same would also be approved by the WHO and other countries, added the plea.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Dear Reader,
Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.
We, however, have a request.
As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practise the journalism to which we are committed.
Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.
Digital Editor
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU