Facts The Petitioner questioned the decision taken by the various States and Union Territories to affix posters outside the residences of persons who have been tested Covid-19 positive and are required to undergo home isolation. Many arguments in this regard were advanced by the Petitioner. It was prayed by the Petitioner inter alia to issue directions to stop publishing the names of Covid-19 Positive persons/patients by the officials of the States and the Union Territories. It was further prayed to stop freely circulating their names in welfare associations of colonies and apartment complexes as the same constitutes serious violation of fundamental rights, right to privacy and dignity. Important Observations After hearing all the parties, the Court observed that the Union of India has not issued any guidelines for pasting or affixing of posters or other signage outside the residence of Covid-19 Positive persons. It was also observed that the guidelines pertaining to Covid-19 are referable to exercise of powers by the authority under the Disaster Management, 2005 and the same do not contain any requirement of pasting of posters against the houses of Covid-19 patients. Final Observations and Held In view of the above, it was finally observed by the Court that “no State or Union Territory is required to paste posters outside the residence of Covid-19 positive persons, as of now.” It was further held in unequivocal terms by the Court that the State Governments and Union Territories can resort to the exercise of posting posters against the houses of Covid-19 patients only when any direction is issued in this regard under the Disaster Management Act, 2005. Analysis The final observations of the Court are quite interesting. On the one hand, the Court made it amply clear that currently, there is no requirement of pasting posters against the houses of the Covid-19 patients and on the other hand, the Court did not close that option or did not held the pasting of posters to be a violation of fundamental rights or illegal per se. Thus, the question whether posters would be required to be affixed against the houses of Covid-19 patients or not in the future has been left wide open by the Court and in a way, the Court refused to venture into this question since in the considered opinion of the Court, it is the job of the authorities under the Disaster Management Act, 2005. Concluding Remarks The Disaster Management Act, 2005 is the main law under which the Union Government has been making endeavours to manage the Covid-19 pandemic. Everything relating to management of the Covid-19 pandemic is being handled by the Union Government under the Disaster Management Act, 2005. I concur with the methodology of the Court that when something is not required currently (pasting of posters against the houses of Covid-19 patients), then it is not necessary to venture into the question of its legality or illegality. At the present moment, it is an academic question at best. But the Court did not stop here since it very well understands the hazards of a pandemic like Covid-19. By giving this judgment, the Court acknowledged that it is not an expert on Covid-19 pandemic, and it left its manner of management to be decided by the experts and competent authorities.