code picture
Photo: File photo
Expansion
The High Court has taken a tough stand in the matter of stalling the cabinet decision by the Delhi Government on the claim of compensation of Rs one crore by the family of a Delhi Police constable who lost his life due to the Corona epidemic while on duty. The court clearly said that it is not appropriate to hold back the decision of the cabinet of the Delhi government.
The court said that the report of the police officers, the tweets made by the Chief Minister and the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi at that time leave no doubt that the 28-year-old constable had lost his life due to the Corona epidemic while in service. The next hearing of the case will be on March 2. Justice Pratibha Maninder Singh said that it was prima facie not proper to withhold the judgment or seek clarification. The matter should be placed before the Group of Ministers and a decision should be taken before the next hearing. The husband of the petitioner woman had died on March 5, 2020. She was pregnant at that time.
The constable was posted at Deep Chand Bandhu Hospital to comply with the lockdown due to the Corona pandemic. The court had last December asked the authorities to decide on payment of Rs 1 crore as compensation to the soldier’s family. In December 2022, the High Court had asked the authorities to take a decision on payment of Rs 1 crore compensation to the family of the constable who died of Covid, and said the Delhi government should not back down from the clear announcement of ex-gratia.
Court cannot decide on purchase of equipment in hospitals
The Delhi High Court said that the courts cannot decide on the purchase of equipment in hospitals, as it is a matter of policy. The Court, however, noted that India has made progress in providing medical facilities with latest technologies and qualified professionals at an affordable cost. A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramaniam Prasad dismissed the PIL filed by Parminder Singh. in which directions were sought to ensure availability of video laryngoscopes in the health system to manage difficult intubation systems. Terming the petition as misconceived, the court said that Singh has not provided any data that absence of video laryngoscope has led to several failures resulting in death of patients. The Court observed that the petitioner has only been used as a front by the manufacturers of video laryngoscopes who wish to promote their products.