SC reserves interim order on mandatory training for ultrasonography

The Supreme Court today reserved its order on a batch of pleas challenging a decision of the Delhi High Court setting aside the mandatory six-month training needed under the rules for performing ultrasonography.

A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud heard arguments on behalf of the Centre and other bodies in favour and against the 2016 Delhi High Court verdict and reserved its interim order on the issue whether some specialist doctors can be allowed to continue doing ultrasonography.

Disposing of petitions including those filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) and the Sonology Society of India, the High Court had set aside Rule 3 (3)(1)(b) of the Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Rules to the extent that it required a person, desirous of setting up of ultrasound clinic, to undergo six-month training in the manner prescribed.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for one of the parties, said as an interim measure, cardiologists and gynaecologists may be allowed to continue doing ultrasonography test till the petitions against the High Court order are finally decided.

Additional Solicitor General Pinky Anand, appearing for the Centre, assailed the High Court decision, saying the government was well within its right to frame the rules.

Earlier, the apex court had issued notice on the Centre's plea challenging the High Court decision setting aside the mandatory six-month training required to perform the ultrasonography.

Besides the Centre, Indian Radiological and Imaging Association, the association of radiologists in the country, had moved the apex court challenging the High Court's decision on the issue.

The high court had declared the Rule 3(3)(1)(b) framed under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PCPNDT) Act, 1994 as ultra vires. It had also done away with the mandatory six-month training which was earlier required to be able to perform an ultrasound under the ambit of the law.

The PIL, filed by NGO Voluntary Health Association of Punjab, was disposed of in 2016 with the apex court passing a slew of directions to stop female foeticide in the country.

(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Dear Reader,

Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.

We, however, have a request.

As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practise the journalism to which we are committed.

Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.

Digital Editor

Business Standard is now on Telegram.
For insightful reports and views on business, markets, politics and other issues, subscribe to our official Telegram channel