The Supreme Court in the case Tarun Mehta v Union of India & Ors in a writ petition seeking modification of Covid 19 policy to allow voluntary re- vaccination of persons who have received the Sputnik-V vaccine and are desirous of traveling abroad, the court refused to interfere in the writ petition.
The Court stated the procedure established by law means the law prescribed by the Parliament at any given point of time. an individual can only be deprived of his personal liberty in accordance with the procedure established by law. It is stated that, in the instant case, there is no procedure which has been established by law and therefore no restriction or fetter can be imposed upon the Petitioner as stated under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
it had been approved by the Respondents and thus, the Petitioner legitimately and bonafidely believed that the same would also be approved by the WHO and other countries, When the Petitioner was administered with Sputnik V.
The Court in the plea stated that 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 MOH & FW is requested to consider it appropriately bearing in mind all relevant aspects with reasonable expedition further more the court granted the petitioner the liberty to do so. The safety and efficacy of the measure requires a careful and calibrated scientific assessment under Article 32 the court has moved without a demand for justice being made before the competent authority.
The COWIN portal, which maintains the vaccination record of all individuals, does not have any provision for revaccination of individuals who have been administered one/two doses of any approved vaccine the petition further stated a person is not allowed/ permitted to get re-vaccinated with any other approved vaccines after having been fully vaccinated with Sputnik V or any other approved vaccine stated by the court in the present policy.
from the WHO The plea further stated that Sputnik V has not received an Emergency Use Listing and that various countries such as the United States of America, Canada, countries forming the European Union, Japan etc. individuals who were either not being allowed to travel to the said countries or made to undergo mandatory quarantine and these countries were treating individuals who have been administered with Sputnik V as un-vaccinated.
It has not been approved by the World Health Organization, he was unable to travel abroad nut in the in petition filled by the petitioner it was stated that the petitioner was vaccinated with the Sputnik-V vaccine, but was still not allowed.
the bench comprising of Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant observed in the plea and granted the petitioner the liberty to move a representation before the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
