The Supreme Court on Tuesday hearing a number of Public Interest Litigations (PIL) sparked by the COVID-19 pandemic hit out at what it called were “Publicity Interest Litigations”, warning of consequences for bringing such cases to the top court.

The COVID-19 pandemic has spawned various PILs which are being filed across high courts and the Supreme Court.

Among the PILs listed for hearing on Tuesday was one that sought nationalisation of the healthcare system, another had sought for non-COVID-19 treatments to be subsidised. The apex court had also listed a PIL that sought for waiver of the goods and services tax (GST) on masks and sanitizers, while another sought a relief package from the centre, for states and union territories to deal with the pandemic.

These PILs invited the strongest comments from the apex court.

The PILs seeking nationalisation of healthcare and subsidies for non-COVID-19 treatments in hospitals were termed as “Publicity Interest Litigations”. The SC remarked that the government, not courts, have to decide who to allow free treatment. The court also observed that treatment in government hospitals is anyways free.

The court came down heavily on the PIL seeking GST waiver for masks and sanitizers as well. It remarked caustically that just because there’s no legal work due to the pandemic does not mean that lawyers get into filing such petitions. The court also warned that it was considering slapping costs on such petitioners for wasting the court’s time.

Another petition had sought a relief package from the union government to the states. Again, the apex court lashed out, saying that not all solutions lie in the courts. Refusing to go into budgetary math, the court noted elected government are in place at the centre and in the states with the mandate to govern.

First Published:Apr 21, 2020 6:27 PM IST