Divergent Orders

The G.O(Ms)No 172 Abstract states ad verbatim as follows:
"Disaster Management - Corona Virus Disease (Covid-19) - Infection prevention and control - The Disaster Management Act 2005 - Notification - Issued"

G.O. (MS) No.239 Dated 15.05.2020, Abstract states ad verbatim, as follows:
"Public Services - Covid 19 - Functioning of Government offices with six day week - Ensuring social distancing with half the work force at any given point of time - Orders - Issued".

In short, the first order is on "Infection Prevention and Control" and the second order is on "Functioning of Government offices"

Now, 3(x) G.O.(Ms) No 239 dated 15.05.2020 states that certain offices "shall continue to function as per the orders issued in G.O.(Ms) No 172 Revenue and Disaster Management department dated 25.03.2020"

How could one order on Prevention' of disease' (G.O.(Ms)172) serve the purpose on staffing matters as detailed in G.O(Ms) 239?

I am IN. You Too Join.

I am IN. You Too Join.

The War is ON, Until Covid's Gone.

The Nation Needs You.

The People Need You. 

https://self4society.mygov.in

They Are Coming!

Covid Horror To Show up Sooner. Act Wiser.
कोविद की गहराई जल्द ही दिखाई  देजाएगी।
कार्य करें अब अभी।
கோவிட் கோரம் தெரிய வரும் நேரம். செயலில் காட்டு தீவிரம்.

Are We Prepared?

On Privacy of Medical Information

On 1.04.2020 was a Media Bulletin, from State Control Room, Directorate of Public Health and Preventive Medicine , Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, with Subject, Daily report on Public Health measures taken for COVID-19.

The above report was incomplete as it contained case numbers from 125 to 234 only, though without mention of Name or other personal details of the affected person.  Link

Following the above was a WhatsApp forwarded message, with an image of certain document, signed by certain responsible government officials with Names, Address, Contact Numbers of certain Covid affected persons.

There was also a news article about certain twins, born on March 27 at B.R. Ambedkar Memorial Hospital in Raipur, whom the parents, "named after the pandemic", as Corona and Covid.  Link

The messages above bring us to consider if Medical Privacy  and Confidentiality of Medical Information is something important at all and also of the awareness on the impact of any breach to such.

It would also be worth considering if there were sufficient conditions to deter leak of official and confidential information to any.

There are, in certain countries a ban on baby names, that could possibly hurt a kid in future, for being a slang, or being a target for bullying, teasing or mockery or of derision.

Reproduced below, is an extract, ad verbatim, a section on Medical Privacy as stated in INDIAN MEDICAL COUNCIL (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002, amended upto 08 October 2016.

7.14 The registered medical practitioner shall not disclose the secrets of a patient that have been learnt in the exercise of his / her profession except –
i) in a court of law under orders of the Presiding Judge;
ii) in circumstances where there is a serious and identified risk to a specific person and / or community; and
iii) notifiable diseases.
In case of communicable / notifiable diseases, concerned public health authorities should be informed immediately.

Next, is this article:
Disclosure of confidential medical information - J M Watwe Link

Long before, on May 31, 2018, Business Standard examined if India India was to be the first to protect health data of citizens with iron-clad law. Link

Before to this, in 2012, was a Draft on Medical Privacy, published by The Centre for Internet & Society. Link

In 2008, the Indian Journal for Medical Ethics has dealt on Privacy and the Right to Information Act, 2005 Link

The above would sure make into the debate rooms, in colleges and interviews, I suppose.

Covid-19 Medical Privacy - Your Opinion आपकी राय தங்களது கருத்து

Binging the Bitcoin Will Soon Bounce Board. DLaw.in

The Supreme Court, on 04 Mar 2019, in it's Judgment stated that the impugned circular of RBI dated 06-04-2018 was liable to be set aside. The circular refers to the "Prohibition on dealing in Virtual Currencies (VC's)

The petitioners, according to the Judgment  in INTERNET AND MOBILE ASSOCIATION 

OF INDIA vs RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, has sought for a "direction to the respondents not to restrict or restrain banks and

financial institutions regulated by RBI, from providing access to the banking services, to those engaged in transactions in crypto assets,..."

The petitioners have succeeded in their prayer above by securing a direction from SC to RBI at instructing a bank to defreeze the frozen assets of a petitioner. 

Additionally the petitioners have succeeded at causing the impugned circular to be set aside.

What was of interest to www.Dlaw.in and fb.com/Lawyarz was that the impugned order was set aside on the "ground of proportionality", which explains if a VC was legal.

The doctrine of proportionality requires a body to maintain balance between its action and purpose for which the powers have been conferred. http://racolblegal.com