Archive · 11 Sep 2026
Supreme Court Allows Withdrawal of HPV Vaccine Safeguards Plea
A doctors’ and academics’ group called the Universal Health Organisation filed a case about HPV vaccines for adolescent girls.
The group said parents might not be receiving enough information before vaccination.
It also claimed HPV vaccination could affect fertility, although the article does not establish that claim as fact.
The group said it was not against vaccines or the vaccination programme itself.
Instead, it wanted better safeguards during the programme.
These safeguards included monitoring possible side effects and creating a compensation plan.
The Supreme Court bench was critical of the petition.
The lawyers were ultimately allowed to withdraw the case.
The article’s headline says the plea was dismissed, but its description says it was withdrawn.
The Supreme Court allowed the Universal Health Organisation to withdraw its PIL concerning the nationwide HPV vaccination programme.
The petition claimed HPV vaccination could affect fertility and sought safeguards for adolescent girls.
The Universal Health Organisation alleged that adequate informed parental consent was not being obtained.
It also sought monitoring of adverse events and a compensation scheme for vaccination-related harm.
The bench was critical of the plea; the report’s headline calls the case dismissed, while its account says it was allowed to be withdrawn.
- Who
- The Universal Health Organisation, represented by Advocate Shivan Raghuwanshi, and a three-judge Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant.
- What
- A PIL concerning safeguards, parental consent, adverse-event monitoring, and compensation in the nationwide HPV vaccination programme.
- When
- Thursday.
- Where
- The Supreme Court; the Universal Health Organisation is described as a Delhi-based forum.
- Why
- The petitioner alleged possible fertility effects, inadequate informed parental consent, and the absence of effective adverse-event monitoring and compensation.
Petitioner’s concerns
Court’s response
Vaccination programme and safeguards
Petitioner’s concerns
The Universal Health Organisation said it was not opposing the vaccination programme, but objected to how it was being implemented and sought informed parental consent, adverse-event monitoring, and compensation.
Court’s response
The three-judge bench was critical of the plea and ultimately allowed the organisation to withdraw it.
Potential fertility effects
Petitioner’s concerns
The petition claimed that HPV affects fertility and sought safeguards for adolescent girls.
Court’s response
The article reports the claim but does not state that the court accepted it.
- Petitioner
- Universal Health Organisation, a Delhi-based forum of doctors and academics
- Vaccine
- Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine
- Target group
- Adolescent girls
- Main consent allegation
- The programme was allegedly being implemented without adequate informed parental consent
- Additional demands
- Adverse-event monitoring and a compensation scheme
- Petition outcome
- The bench allowed the petitioner to withdraw the PIL, although the headline describes the plea as dismissed
- Bench
- Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V Mohana