E-Paper
Not feasible to pass general order on door-to-door vaccination: Supreme Court
The court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Youth Bar Association of India seeking door-to-door Covid vaccination for all citizens, particularly the elderly, special persons with disability, the less privileged
The Supreme Court on Wednesday left it to the states to decide on implementing door-to-door Covid-19 vaccination, saying that a general order cannot be issued for the entire country considering the diversity of conditions across states.
The court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Youth Bar Association of India seeking door-to-door Covid vaccination for all citizens, particularly the elderly, special persons with disability, the less privileged and weaker sections of society, and those who were unable to register online.
While directing the petitioner to approach the ministry of health and family welfare (MoHFW) with their suggestions, the bench of justices Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli said, “The vaccination programme is already underway and has progressed considerably. At this stage it is difficult for us to issue general directions having regard to the diversity of conditions existing in the country. Any direction by us should not impinge upon the administrative power of the state governments to take any decision, including door-to-door vaccination.”
In July, the Bombay high court asked the Maharashtra government to consider providing door-to-door vaccination for the elderly and those bedridden or wheelchair-bound.
The top court said it was aware of the Bombay high court order but reminded the petitioner, “These are not matters where with one brush you can pass a direction for the entire country. Can you say the same conditions exist in Ladakh as in Uttar Pradesh or any urban area has the same conditions as prevailing in rural areas?”
The court also asked the petitioner organisation, comprising mostly lawyers, whether they had checked the feasibility of carrying out such an exercise.
“These are matters of research and for you to just come to court and seek directions is not enough. You have just picked up an issue and want door-to-door vaccination. Nobody has applied their mind if this is feasible. When you ask for such relief, you do not understand the diversity of this country and complexity of the problem.”
The petition had relied on the fact that vulnerable sections of the population should be first attended to through a door-to-door vaccination policy. This way, the petition argued, there will be minimum risk of getting infected by avoiding visit to the vaccination centres. The petition also sought directions for drawing out a standard operating procedure (SOP) on door-to-door vaccination facility and a toll-free 24X7 portal for this purpose.
The vaccination policy is being monitored by the court in a separate suo motu proceeding wherein a National Task Force has been constituted as part of measures to contain the spread of Covid-19. The court clarified that its present order will not have any bearing on the suo motu proceedings. When the petitioner’s lawyer Bably Singh sought a time-bound order for the government to consider their suggestions, the bench replied, “We will not pass such an order as you cannot imagine how pressurised the officials of the ministry of health and family welfare are. You can make your concrete suggestions that may be considered at the appropriate level. They will certainly take a decision.”
