38.6c New Delhi, India, Sunday, February 15, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

High Court of Jharkhand seeks response from Centre on relevant authority to control the price of critical medical equipment [READ ORDER]

By Saakshi Singh Rawat      15 June, 2021 11:30 AM      0 Comments
High Court of Jharkhand seeks  response from Centre on relevant authority to control the price of critical medical equipment [READ ORDER]

The Jharkhand High Court has sought Centre's response on the action taken by its competent authority for controlling the price of critical medical equipments such as pulse Oximeters and oxygen concentrators included under the Drugs Price Control Order, 2013.

A division bench involving Chief Justice Ravi Ranjan and Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad was hearing a petition seeking guidelines from the Supreme Court to the Centre and the States to bring medical devices such as oxygen concentrators, pulse oximeters, and ventilator machines under price control by citing Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and the National Disaster Management Act, 2005.

Quoting Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act,1955, and the National Disaster Management Act,2005, the petition also requested orders to bringCOVID-19 vaccines, such as Covishield and Covaxin, within price caps.

During the proceeding, the Petitioner claimed that the Central Government issued a notification on February 11, 2020, proclaiming medical devices to be "drugs." Furthermore, for tracking the price action of vital medical equipment like Pulse Oximeters and Oxygen Concentrators included under the DPCO, the office memorandum dated 29.06.2020 was used.

Because of the aforementioned arguments, the ASGI for the Centre requested a week to obtain instruction on the issue.

As a result, let this issue be posted on 17.06.2021 so that the relevant authority of the Central Government can inform this Court via affidavit of the measures taken in response to the notification dated 11.02.2020 and the office memorandum dated 29.06.2020," the Court has ordered. On 17th June, the case will be heard again.

The petitioner was represented by Shadab Ansari, while the Centre was represented by ASGI Rajiv Sinha. The State was represented by Rajiv Ranjan and Piyush Chitresh.

Concerning the Plea, in light of the country's health crisis and in the interests of the public, the petition requests that the price of life-saving Covid-19 vaccines like as Covishield and Covaxin, as well as medical devices such as oxygen concentrators, pulse oximeters, and ventilator machines, be regulated.

The petition stated that the Central Government has delegated the task of determining the price of this life-saving Covid-19 Vaccine to the manufacturer, who has done so in an illogical, arbitrary, and unfair manner.

Furthermore, the plea asserted that manufacturing companies have rectified the prices of lifesaving vaccines and medical devices, and the maximum retail prices of such lifesaving vaccines and medical devices have been kept very high (sometimes more than double), which is irrational, unfair, and capricious.

"Vaccine manufacturers have arbitrarily set vaccine prices for the federal government, state governments, and private hospitals, which is unethical and unjustified," the petition stated.

 

[READ ORDER]



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

resignation-on-medical-grounds-attracts-forfeiture-of-pension-service-madras-hc-full-bench
Trending Judiciary
Resignation on Medical Grounds Attracts Forfeiture of Pension Service: Madras HC Full Bench [Read Order]

Madras High Court Full Bench rules resignation on medical grounds leads to forfeiture of past service under Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.

09 February, 2026 12:16 PM
madras-hc-clarifies-section-37-of-ndps-act-not-applicable-to-acceptance-of-bond-for-appearance
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Clarifies: Section 37 of NDPS Act Not Applicable to Acceptance of Bond for Appearance [Read Order]

Madras High Court says Section 37 NDPS Act doesn’t apply to acceptance of bond for appearance on summons, as it is distinct from grant of bail.

09 February, 2026 12:20 PM
sc-refers-matter-to-larger-bench-to-resolve-conflicting-judgments-on-third-partys-right-under-under-order-ix-rule-13-cpc
Trending Judiciary
SC Refers Matter To Larger Bench To Resolve Conflicting Judgments On Third Party’s Right Under Under Order IX Rule 13 CPC [Read Order]

Supreme Court refers the issue of third party rights under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to a larger bench to resolve conflicting judgments on ex parte decrees.

09 February, 2026 12:35 PM
bombay-sessions-court-grants-bail-in-193-crore-cyber-fraud-case-reaffirms-bail-is-rule-jail-is-exception
Trending Judiciary
Bombay Sessions Court Grants Bail in ₹1.93 Crore Cyber Fraud Case, Reaffirms ‘Bail Is Rule, Jail Is Exception’ [Read Order]

Bombay Sessions Court grants bail in ₹1.93 crore cyber fraud case, citing right to liberty as investigation is complete and accused not direct beneficiary.

09 February, 2026 04:17 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email