Delhi High Court to the Govt: Advertise the Correct Way of Using a Mask

Must Read

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi,...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions,...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by...

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour...

Follow us

The case in hand is Pulkit Jain vs Government of NCT Of Delhi And Anr. The Petitioner filed a PIL in Delhi High Court. It sought for the Delhi Government to advertise the appropriate way to use a mask.

Brief Facts of the Case

On 19th June 2020, the Delhi HC had asked the Delhi Government to advertise the correct way of using a face mask. The Court asked the Government to follow the instructions by the Union Health Ministry, in both the print and electronic media.

The Bench consisted of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan. The Court ordered the display of advertisements on the websites of all municipal authorities and Delhi Cantonment Board. The aim was to inform the public at large and create awareness.

Petitioner’s Submission

Mr Vivek Punia represented the Petitioner. The Petitioner filed the plea seeking directions to be issued to the Delhi Govt. to frame policies. The PIL seeks instructions/guidelines norms for the proper wearing of all kinds of masks. It also seeks to issue and publicize these instructions for public welfare in times of COVID-19 pandemic.

Respondent’s Submission

Mr Naushad Ahmed Khan represented the Delhi Government. The Respondent submitted the counter-arguments regarding guidance for using a mask. They claimed that the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare already issued instructions. It stated “when and how to use masks”.

Court’s Observation

After hearing the arguments of both the side, the Court made an observation. The Court noted that there are pictorial narrations and presentations as to when and how to wear a mask. These guidelines are by the Union Health Ministry.

The Counsel appearing for the Petitioner had also taken this Court to Annexure P-6 to the memo of this petition. It shows the pictorial presentation by the World Health Organization.

Court’s Order

The Court said, “Looking to the fact that there are already guidelines issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, on how to use masks by the public in this Covid-19 pandemic situation, we see no reason to give further guidance or directions in this regard to the respondents.”

The Court further added, “Nonetheless, respondent, if their experts so advise, may make necessary changes in the pictorial presentation or amend the guidelines.”


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi, called for records of the...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent on immigrants to comply with. Background The...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention order of the husband of...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions, as well as shareholder disputes...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by P. Sankar & V. Sobana....

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour killing against her by her...

Punjab Woman Accuses Punjab Police of Keeping Husband in Illegal Custody and Framing Him in a False Case

In the case of Geeta v the State of Punjab, the petitioner evoked a writ petition of habeas corpus as she claimed that her...

Addition of Words as Prefixes or Suffixes Is an Infringement of a Registered Trademark: Delhi High Court

Justice Jayanth Nath allowed the Times Group to use its registered trademark “Newshour”, in the case of Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd v. ARG Outlier...

Just Because the Deceased Did Not Have License, Does Not Imply He Was Negligent: Chhattisgarh High Court

In the case of Hemlal & Others v. Dayaram & Others, a Single Bench of Chhattisgarh High Court consisting of Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal annunciated various...

Hoardings Are Movable Property Under Section 2(3) of DMC Act Subject To the Twin Test: Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court in the case of Delhi International Airport v South Delhi Metropolitan Corporation discussed in detail the provision under Section 2(3) of the DMC...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -