Intention of Court not to interfere but to “supervise”: Madras HC in Suo Motu Plea’s for Covid management

Read Time: 04 minutes

The Madras High Court while disposing of pleas relating to the second surge of the pandemic and the emergency situation that it gave rise to said, 

“It was never the intention of the Court to take over administration, the exercise was only meant to be supervisory at a time when the pandemic raged at an alarming level. Since the matters appear now to be under control, these petitions have to be brought to an end with the hope that appropriate measures will be taken by both the Union and the State Government and the Government of the Union Territory to deal with any further surge by being more prepared than the country was when the second surge descended upon us”.

The bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Senthil Kumar Ramamoorthy observed that though the anticipated third wave of Covid had no scientific basis but it is best that the facilities developed on emergency basis to deal with the second surge are not dismantled immediately, so that in the event there is a third surge within the next four to six months, the same may be tackled with adequate facilities at hand.

As far as vaccines are concerned, the Court observed that the Union Government has undertaken a massive drive from June 21, 2021 and a record number of people were vaccinated on the first day itself and was hopeful that the vaccination of the entire population is completed earlier than envisaged.

It was further observed that  awareness drives have been undertaken, both in the print and the electronic media, “to ensure that the superstitions and the grandmother's tales pertaining to the side effects of vaccine do not deter people from coming forward and being inoculate”.

The Court however observed that there are certain other areas which need to be looked into, including students and others requiring to travel abroad and the accelerated need to provide vaccination, possibly the second dose, to such persons”.

The Court also  appreciated the several helpful inputs by lawyers and others who intervened in the matter, “not the least of them being to feed stray and abandoned animals during the lockdown period when scavenging became difficult”.