Whether the present case is maintainable in the high court of Bhanu Pradesh?

1) Whether the moon pharmaceutical pvt ltd is breaching right to health?

2) Whether writ application is maintainable or not if the private body is
breaching the fundamental right while performing a public duty?

In S.P. Gupta v. Union of India,

(1) this Court has laid down that its jurisdiction can be invoked by a third
party in the case of violation of the constitutional rights of another person
or determinate class of persons who, by reason of poverty, helplessness,
disability or social or economic disadvantage is unable to move the Court
personally for relief. The Court observed further that where the public
injury was suffered by an indeterminate class of persons from the breach
of a public duty or from the violation of a constitutional provision of the
law, any member of the public having sufficient interest can maintain an
action for judicial redress for such public injury. The principle was
qualified by the reservation that such petitioner should act bona fide and
not for personal gain or private profit, nor be moved by political or other
oblique motivation. The doctrine of standing has thus been enlarged in
this country to provide, where reasonably possible, access to justice to
large sections of people for whom so far it had been a matter of despair.
2) Burrabazar Fire Works Dealers vs The Commissioner Of Police and
Ors.

52. Accordingly, safety, health and peace is guaranteed to the citizens of

India and none can carry on any trade or business which may seriously
affect safety, health and peace of the Community.

53. Accordingly, it must be held that Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of

India does not guarantee the fundamental right to carry on trade or business
which creates pollution or which takes away that communities' safety, health
and peace. It cannot be said that a citizen have a fundamental right under Article
19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India to carry on trade or business and/or
manufacture poison which may be used for killing of people. This right is
negative as nobody has any right to carry on any trade or business in
intoxicating liqueurs by virtue of the right conferred under Article 19(1)(g).