Orissa HC order restraining State from reviewing Telemedicine policy set aside by Supreme Court

Source: barandbench.com

The Supreme Court recently set aside an order of the Orissa High Court restraining the State from reviewing its policy on telemedicine. The Supreme Court ruled that it amounted to an interference in an exercise which was purely in the executive domain.

The judgment by a Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Aniruddha Bose came in an appeal against an order of the Orissa High Court. The High Court had passed some interim orders in a petition regarding the implementation of policy concerning telemedicine in the State.

By that order, the State of Odisha was restrained from reviewing its policy on telemedicine and from formulating appropriate policy in that regard.

In this regard, the Supreme Court held that there was no valid justification for the High Court to restrain the State in a matter which was purely in the executive domain. The Supreme Court also said that the High Court was not justified in entrusting the exercise of verification to a former Judge of that Court.

“We are clearly of the view that there was no valid justification to restrain the State from reviewing its policy and from formulating an appropriate policy to govern telemedicine centers in the State of Odisha. This is a matter which is purely in the executive domain. The High Court was not justified in entrusting the exercise of verification to a former Judge of that Court.”

The petition before the High Court challenges the initiative by the State Government to formulate and implement a holistic policy for telemedicine which is aimed to benefit the people of Odisha by making technology available for wide dispersal of medical benefits.

During the course of the hearing, the High Court had called upon the State to file an affidavit detailing the steps taken by the government as regards the selection of entrepreneurs. The State had filed its reply providing details regarding the selection of entrepreneurs, the status of loans sanctioned and disbursed, among other things. The State had also placed on record its grievance regarding inadequate data on the actual benefits provided by the opening of telemedicine nodes by the Respondent organisation.

A decision was taken by the State not to permit further expansion of the project before the policy was revisited with a holistic perspective. However, the State had submitted before the High Court that the process for selecting entrepreneurs must be allowed to go on in a transparent manner after a request for proposal is made.

Despite that, the process of reviewing the policy was stayed by the High Court. The same was challenged before the Supreme Court.

Counsel for Odisha argued that the High Court had transgressed into the area of policy by restraining the State from reviewing its policy.

Finding merit in the same, the Supreme Court set aside the orders passed by the High Court. It granted liberty to the State to undertake the exercise required for the formulation and implementation of an appropriate policy.

The Supreme Court also requested the High Court to adjudicate the petition before it expeditiously and make an endeavour to conclude the same within three months. It further requested the Chief Justice of the High Court to place the matter before a Bench presided over by him.