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.)