Near-to-door vaccination is good, consider door-to-door as well: HC to Centre

The Central government on Tuesday informed the Bombay high court (HC) that the National Expert Group for Vaccine Administration of Covid-19 (NEGVAC) had unanimously opined that “near-to-door” vaccination was an appropriate solution for the elderly and specially-abled persons than door-to-door

The Central government on Tuesday informed the Bombay high court (HC) that the National Expert Group for Vaccine Administration of Covid-19 (NEGVAC) had unanimously opined that “near-to-door” vaccination was an appropriate solution for the elderly and specially-abled persons than door-to-door. However, after the petitioner pointed out that the expert group had failed to address the issue of bed-ridden persons, HC asked the Centre to consider door-to-door vaccination as well.

HT Image

The Central government on Tuesday informed HC that till May 28 in all 25,309 adverse events following immunization (AEFI) were reported, of which 1,186 were serious and severe, and 475 post-vaccination deaths were reported across country.

The division bench of chief justice Dipankar Datta and justice Girish Kulkarni was hearing public interest litigation (PIL) filed by city-based lawyers Dhruti Kapadia and Kunal Tiwari, seeking directions to the Centre, the state and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to provide door-to-door vaccination to those aged over 75, the specially-abled and bed-ridden.

During the course of the hearing on PIL, the bench was informed by additional solicitor general Anil Singh, that the NEGVAC had convened a meeting of experts at Delhi following the court directions on May 20.

The affidavit filed through Satyendra Singh, under-secretary, Union ministry of health and family welfare (MoHFW) stated, “NEGVAC agreed that since the specially-abled and bed-ridden elderly persons have limited mobility due to their physical conditions, there is a need to increase access by bringing vaccination services closer maintaining all necessary precautions.”

Singh submitted that all members in May 25 meeting unanimously agreed that vaccines cannot be given at home due to the risks cited by the expert committee, which include addressing AEFI in an effective manner and maintaining protocol of observation of every beneficiary for 30 minutes after vaccination, maintaining the cold chain and ensuring low vaccine wastage.

The affidavit stated near to home vaccination centres strategy for the elderly and specially-abled was flexible, people-centric and followed a community-based approach and sessions can be conducted at facilities near home, such as schools, old age homes, Resident Welfare Association (RWA) office, sub-health centres, panchayat ghar etc.

On her part, Kapadia pointed out that some civic authorities and societies had undertaken door-to-door vaccination and there were no adverse effects reports.

She also pointed to the data provided by the Centre wherein out of the 20 crore Indians vaccinated there were only 1,186 serious cases and 475 deaths which showed that the apprehensions of NEGVAC were over-cautious.

Thereafter, the court asked the Centre that while it appreciated the near-to-door policy suggested by NEGVAC and in light of the affidavit, why it could not consider taking a step further and visit homes of beneficiaries who are unable to visit vaccination centres. Court then posted the hearing of PIL to Wednesday.