Excellent study material for all civil services aspirants - begin learning - Kar ke dikhayenge!
SHARE:
Supreme Court sides with UP govt, stays Allahabad HC order on Covid
Read more on - Polity | Economy | Schemes | S&T | Environment
- The story: The Supreme Court (SC) said that high courts should not pass directions that are not implementable, and then it stayed the Allahabad High Court order relating to management of the COVID-19 situation in Uttar Pradesh state. The HC had said that the entire healthcare system in villages and small cities of the state was "Ram bharose" (at God's mercy).
- What was the HC order: On May 17, 2021, the High Court while hearing a PIL over the coronavirus spread and the condition of quarantine centres in UP, had passed directions (while taking into account the death of one Santosh Kumar (64), who was admitted to an isolation ward at a Meerut hospital).
- The Allahabad High Court directed the UP govt. that every village in UP should be provided with at least two ambulances having intensive care unit facilities. The panicked government submitted that there were 97,000 villages in the state and it would not be "humanly possible" to provide such ambulances in one month.
- A vacation bench at SC of Justices Vineet Saran and BR Gavai said the directions of the High Court passed on May 17 shall not be treated as directives but an advice to the UP government. The bench said there are some observations in the order which may be well meaning but passed by the court in anxiety to provide relief to the general public. It said such directions cannot be implemented and it shall be treated as advice.
- The bench said that looking at the matter in depth, “We are of the opinion that the High Court should consider looking into the possibility of implementation while passing any directions, and if any such direction is not implementable, then the High Court should refrain from passing it”.
- The SC bench referred to another direction that five medical colleges of the state should be upgraded to PG Medical Institutes within four months, and noted that the state government has said that it is not "practically feasible" in such a short period of time.
- Which doctrine: The SC bench said the High Court should adopt the "doctrine of impossibility" (a situation when it is impossible for a party to perform), which has been upheld by this court. The SC stayed the order but did not stay the proceedings before the High Court. It said the High Court while considering a matter on management of COVID-19 situation which has a national or trans-national ramification should refrain from dealing with it as the top court is seized of the issue.
- Tushar Mehta doesn't like the HC 'intereference': Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the UP government, said that different benches of the High Court (single judge bench and double judge benches) are passing different orders on COVID management. He wanted only the Chief Justice of the SC to hear all matters related to COVID management. The bench responded to say it is not going to pass any general directions or a sweeping order as it does not want to demoralise the High Courts or the state government.
- Death without dignity: On May 17, the Allahabad High Court while hearing a PIL over the spread of coronavirus and the condition of quarantine centres in UP passed a slew of directions while taking into account the death of one Santosh Kumar (64), who was admitted to an isolation ward at a Meerut hospital. The doctors there had failed to identify him and disposed off the body as unidentified, according to a probe report. Santosh had fainted at a hospital bathroom on April 22 and efforts were made to revive him but he died. The hospital staff could not identify the dead and failed to locate his file. Thus, it was taken as a case of an unidentified body. That prompted the High Court use the term "Ram bharose".
- Large corporates: On the issue of coronavirus vaccination, the HC suggested that big business houses who take benefits under taxation laws by donating to various religious organisations may be asked to divert their funds for vaccines. Every nursing home/ hospital, which has more than 20 beds, should have at least 40 per cent of their beds as intensive care units, the court said. Every nursing home and hospital, which has more than 30 beds, should compulsorily have an oxygen production plant, the court added.
- Summary: The citizens often approach the state High Courts seeking justice. These too are empowered constitutional courts, with a range of powers to protect fundamental rights. The Supreme Court did well in not putting any blanket ban on HC's powers in tackling emerging Covid contingencies.
* Content sourced from free internet sources (publications, PIB site, international sites, etc.). Take your
own subscriptions. Copyrights acknowledged.
COMMENTS