As per the case facts, a public interest writ petition was filed seeking transparency in vaccine clinical trial data, disclosure of expert committee minutes and decisions, and post-vaccination adverse event ... data. The petition also argued that vaccine mandates were unconstitutional and violated individual rights. The petitioner raised concerns about emergency vaccine approvals and coercive vaccination. The question arose regarding the government's obligation to disclose detailed vaccine-related data and whether vaccine mandates infringed on fundamental rights, especially the right to self-determination. Finally, the Supreme Court disposed of the writ petition. The Court affirmed individual autonomy and the right to refuse vaccination but stated that the government's vaccination policy was not unreasonable. It noted that mandates, if disproportionate, could infringe Article 21, but no such mandate was currently enforced. The Court directed the government to make public reports on adverse events and key findings from pediatric vaccine clinical trials. It also emphasized that judicial review should not second-guess expert scientific policy decisions.