Supreme Court on Covid-19 Relief Package by the Government

 

INTRODUCTION

 

On today’s show, we will discuss the case of Reepak Kansal v. Union of India and Others, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 554 of 2021, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, interpreted S. 12 of the Disaster Management Act that provides for ex gratia assistance to sufferers of a disaster, in light of the Covid-19 pandemic. Ex gratia literally means “by favour.”

 

FACTS IN BRIEF

 

The brief facts of the case are that several writ petitions were filed before the Supreme Court seeking ex gratia monetary compensation for the families of the deceased who have succumbed to the pandemic of Covid-19. Further reliefs were sought in this case seeking issuance of any official document stating cause of death, to the family members of the deceased who died due to Covid-19 and seeking direction to the State to provide social security and rehabilitation to the victims of Covid-19.

 

IMPORTANT PROVISION OF LAW

 

Now, let us discuss the important provision of law involved in the present case. The Court perused Section 12 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 (in short, “DM Act”), that reads as: -

 

“12. Guidelines for minimum standards of relief. —The National Authority shall recommend guidelines for the minimum standards of relief to be provided to persons affected by disaster, which shall include, —

(i) the minimum requirements to be provided in the relief camps in relation to shelter, food, drinking water, medical cover and sanitation;

(ii) the special provisions to be made for widows and orphans;

(iii) ex gratia assistance on account of loss of life as also assistance on account of damage to houses and for restoration of means of livelihood;

(iv) such other relief as may be necessary.”

 

It is pertinent to note that the word “shall” has been used twice in Section 12. In order to understand it further, let us move on the observations of the Court in the present case.

 

OBSERVATIONS OF THE COURT

 

Firstly, the Court emphasized on the interpretation of Section 12 of the DM Act and pondered whether the word “shall” used in Section 12 implies discretion on part of the National Authority or not.

 

Secondly, in order to understand the true purport of Section 12, the Court perused the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the DM Act that mandates one of its objects as “mitigation” of a disaster. The Court also perused the scheme of the DM Act and observed that the responsibility of laying down the policies and consequent relief/assistance in respect of a disaster has been given to the National Authority created under the DM Act. Such ex gratia assistance is to be given on account of loss of life, damage to houses and for restoration of means of livelihood.

 

Thirdly, in light of what we just discussed, it was the view of the Court that “the beneficial provision of the legislation must be literally construed so as to fulfil the statutory purpose and not to frustrate it.” The Court further stated that even by the own admission of the Central Government vide its Letter dated 14.03.2020, Covid-19 pandemic has been declared as a “notified disaster”. According to the Court, once a disaster has been notified under the DM Act, “Section 12 of DMA 2005 shall be applicable and is mandatorily to be complied with, with respect to any disaster, within the meaning of Section 2(d) of DMA 2005.”

 

Fourthly, the Court suggested that Covid-19 pandemic being a peculiar disaster having widespread impact requires “an approach different from the one that is applied to other disasters/natural disasters” and “there is a need to focus simultaneously on prevention, preparedness, mitigation and recovery, which calls for a different order of mobilization of both financial and technical resources.”

 

Fifthly, the Court opined that the “the function of the Court is to see that lawful authority is not abused but is not to appropriate to itself the task entrusted to that authority” and “the Government should be free to take policy decisions/decide priorities.” Therefore, the Court stated that “no relief can be granted to direct the National Authority/Central Government/State Governments to pay a particular amount towards ex gratia assistance on account of loss of life to the family members of the persons who have died due to Covid-19” and it should be left to the wisdom of the appropriate authorities.

 

Sixthly, with respect to issuance of an official document stating Covid-19 as cause of death, the Court held that “it is the duty of every authority to issue accurate/correct death certificates stating the correct and accurate cause of death, so that the family members of the deceased who died due to Covid-19 may not face any difficulty in getting the benefits of the schemes that may be declared by the Government for the death of the deceased, who died due to Covid-19” and the Death Certificates should be issued using a simplified procedure mandatorily indicating Covid-19 as the cause of death in appropriate cases. Such issuance of Death Certificates is to be done even where a person has died 2-3 months after being Covid positive. Further, if the Death Certificate is not according to the guidelines given by the Court, then the authorities ought to make necessary corrections in the Death Certificate.

 

Seventhly, the Court highlighted the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Package “under which a comprehensive personal accident cover of Rs. 50 lakhs have been provided to 22.12 lakh health care providers throughout the country, including community health workers and private health workers who may have been in direct contact and care of Covid-19 patients and may be at risk of being impacted/infected by this.”

 

And lastly, the Court held that the guidelines discussed here are to be implemented within a period of six weeks from the date of the judgment i.e., 30.06.2021.

 

Those were the observations and directions of the Court. So, what are my concluding remarks.

 

CONCLUSION

 

I feel that the governments in India have done too little and whatever they are doing currently is too late. The preparations for management of the Covid-19 pandemic were abysmal and it has forced common populace to the brink of destitution and misery. Relief packages are the need of the hour to provide some respite to the common man who have not only lost their near ones but also have suffered immense financial torment. I hope that the guidelines prescribed by the Court in the present case are implemented within six weeks in letter and spirit by the appropriate authorities.