HC stays Govt's mandatory vaccination order
Source: Chronicle News Service

Imphal, July 15 2021: Pointing out that it is for the government to dispel fears by educating people about the advantages of vaccination and allay their apprehension over any adverse effects, High Court of Manipur has made it clear that the state cannot impose conditions upon the citizens so as to compel them to get vaccinated by holding out a threat or by putting them at a disadvantage for failing to get inoculated.

A division bench of the High Court comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Kh Nobin Singh stayed 'paragraph 2' of the notification issued by special secretary (home) on June 30.In a PIL filed by Osbert Khaling, petitioner counsel argued that prioritising vaccinated people is discriminatory and violated Articles 14, 19 and 21 of Indian constitution.

Counsel of the state, which is one of the respondents, countered that the impugned notification is an appeal to the public and not mandatory to which the petitioner's counsel argued that the notification in its language is coercive in nature thereby making it mandatory.

NREGA job card holders are deprived of their works as they not vaccinated.

Even though vaccination is the only way to prevent from the infectious disease, imposition of such coercive conditions for resuming business or profession clearly violates Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution.

As such, prioritising vaccination will create a huge gap and inequality in society and will drastically affect economically weaker sections, the petitioner's counsel opined.

The petition had pointed out that though vaccination is the need of the hour, there is nothing to show that vaccinated persons cannot be infected with the deadly virus or cannot be spreaders.

If both cover their faces with a mask as per Covid-19 protocols, there is no reason to discriminate against the unvaccinated people, the petition mentioned adding that such notification clearly deprives the unvaccinated, marginalised sections and further violates Article 21 of the Constitution which gives right to life and livelihood.

After hearing arguments of both sides, the court observed that it is the duty of the state to give awareness on vaccination to its people and the people should come out for inoculating the vaccine voluntarily.

It continued that the death of a woman after inoculating the vaccine has caused apprehension in the minds of the people as the actual cause of the death is undisclosed yet.

The court directed the state to file its reply within two weeks.

The June 30 notification, that proposed to relax curfew restrictions in a calibrated manner by assessing the COVID-19 situation, mentioned that while opening up, without compromising on public safety, the government would prioritise reopening of institutions, organisations, factories, shops, markets and private offices, among others, where employees and workers were vaccinated against COVID-19.The government had further said that the new order would also apply to NREGA job holders and workers of government and private projects.

Comment