Courts Update SC reserves verdict on plea seeking Ex-gratia payment to...

SC reserves verdict on plea seeking Ex-gratia payment to families of people dying of COVID-19

-

New Delhi, Jun 21 (ILNS) The Supreme Court today reserved its judgement on the matter of providing ex-gratia compensation of Rs four lakh each to the families of people, who have died due to COVID-19.

The Division Bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice M R Shah asked both the parties to file their written submissions within three days.

Senior Advocate S B Upadhyay, appearing on behalf of petitioner Reepak Kansal, submitted before the Court that he appreciated the efforts of government regarding providing the assistance to the front liners in the fight against Novel Coronavirus, but in the present case, “we are dealing with some bigger issues”.

According to Section 12 of the National Disaster Management Act, 2005, the National Authority shall recommend guidelines for the minimum standards of relief to the persons affected by disaster, which shall include:-

(i) the minimum requirements to be provided in 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.

The Court asked Mr Upadhyay whether the notification issued by the Government in 2015, by which the ex-gratia payment was provided, was applicable for the pandemic, or they need to issue some fresh measures to provide them assistance.

Mr Upadhyay replied that insurance cover has been given to the doctors, but what about others, who are also frontline warriors like paramedics and police, and they are covered under the insurance cover, by which doctors are covered.

Therefore, some scheme is required to be framed, keeping in the mind that Government has this constitutional obligation.

He further submitted that COVID-19 is a notified disaster, on which Section 12 of the act applies that includes Ex-Gratia assistance on account of damage.

Though the respondent said that this is not a kind of disaster which had been envisaged for which NDMA Act has been formulated because those are almost one time event and Corona is almost recurring, first in 2020 and then 2021. But this contention is not correct as government has itself declared it as disaster/pandemic and floods and earthquakes are also reoccurring events.

Regarding notification issued by the Government in 2015, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that it was for the one time and issued only for four years.

The Court observed, “The 2015 notification is not applicable and you cannot insist that Rs four lakh shall be given. Every disaster has a different impact and the assistance be provided in the ratio of gravity of the pandemic.”

Mr Upadhyay prayed for extension of the notification issued by the Government in 2015 and requested that if Government cannot extend the operation of notification, then they have to frame some scheme for ex-gratia payment. Section 12 of the Act has the term ‘shall’ not ‘may,’ which mandates the duty of the Government.

Petitioner Gaurav Kumar Bansal also submitted his contention that an insurance programme in National Insurance Scheme for disaster-related deaths in India could be a feasible intervention for several reasons.

On the strength of statewise disaster mortality data, a National Insurance Scheme could be set up in partnership with an insurance company. The state government may join the scheme. The Union Government could also contribute to the risk.

Such insurance premium would generally be less than what the state government pay by way of ex-gratia assistance. In case of death, the insurance company would release the pay out to the affected family at different stages. The respondents are only focussing on the medical staff, but there are also some people doing their duty like disposing the body at crematorium etc, he noted.

Sumeer Sodhi, on behalf of the families of the deceased, filed an Intervention application and raised a question, whether unequal disaster can be treated equally? What is happening today is that they are discriminated as in Delhi the people died due to Covid are being paid an amount of 50 thousand and in Bihar it is 4 lacs. So, how can centre allow this type of discrimination?

The Central government has told the Supreme Court that it cannot afford to pay ex-gratia compensation of Rs 4 lakh each to the families of people who have died due to Covid-19. The government has also said the disaster management law mandating compensation applies only to natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods etc, it said.

“If the entire SDRF funds get consumed on ex-gratia for Covid-19 victims, the states may not have sufficient funds for organizing Covid-19 response, for provision of various essential medical and other supplies, or to take care of other disasters like cyclones, floods, etc. Hence, the prayer of the petitioner for payment of ex-gratia to all deceased persons due to Covid-19 is beyond the fiscal affordability of the State governments,” Government said.

“All deaths with a diagnosis of Covid-19, irrespective of co-morbidities, are to be classified as deaths due to Covid -19. The only exception could be where there is a clear alternative cause of death, that cannot be attributed to Covid -19 (e.g. accidental trauma, poisoning, acute myocardial infarction, etc), where Covid-19 is an incidental finding,” the Centre said.

The Court has asked Mr Mehta to look into the matter of the death certificate issued by the doctors where the cause of death is either not mentioned or just shows the reason something else. There must be some method to make correction to those certificates so they shall not be left out of getting financial assistance they ought to have got if the certificates were correct. ILNS/GM/RJ

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest news

Supreme Court stays Calcutta High Court order on payment of salaries to part-time teachers

New Delhi Sept 20(ILNS): The Supreme Court today issued notice and stayed the Calcutta High Court order...

Covid-19 second wave: Delhi HC stays trial against Gautam Gambhir, his foundation

New Delhi Sept 20(ILNS): The Delhi High Court today stayed the criminal trial pending before the Rohini District & Sessions Court, New Delhi, in the...

Delhi High Court seeks response from Delhi government on a plea seeking extension of private retail liquor licenses

New Delhi Sept 20(ILNS): The Delhi High Court, on Monday, sought a response from the Delhi Government...

Bond for rural areas service: Supreme Court upholds MP High Court order, dismisses appeal of more than 80 MBBS doctors

Madhya Pradesh Sept 20(ILNS): The Supreme Court today upheld the order of Madhya Pradesh High Court which...

Counsel’s inability to understand proceeding in bail hearing amuses Supreme Court bench

New Delhi Sept 20(ILNS): The Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice NV Ramana and comprising of...

Allahabad HC seeks Centre’s response on plea for CBI inquiry into the death of BSF soldier

Allahabad Sept 20(ILNS): The Allahabad High Court on September 15, sought the response of the Central Government...

Must read

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you