IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S. MANIKUMAR, SHAJI P. CHALY, JJ.
Sibha S. – Petitioner
Versus
Union of India, Rep. by Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 11054 of 2021
Decided On : 19-05-2021
Annual income of the beneficiary citizens, as the eligibility criteria for free vaccine - 1st and 2nd respondents to fix and publish the rate of vaccine in Kerala for the COVID-19 for Non eligible category, based on their annual Income - Petitioner is a lawyer by profession. She has filed this public interest writ petition seeking interference of this Court, on a decision taken by the respondents, which according to her, is in total violation of the concept of a welfare State and principles of good governance
Finding of the Court:
scope of judicial review of an administrative action is very limited. Unless the Court comes to a conclusion that the decision-maker has not understood the law correctly that regulates his decision-making power or when it is found that the decision of the decision-maker is vitiated by irrationality and that too on the principle of “Wednesbury unreasonableness” or unless it is found that there has been a procedural impropriety in the decision-making process, it would not be permissible for the High Court to interfere in the decision-making process. It is also equally well settled that it is not permissible for the Court to examine the validity of the decision but this Court can examine only the correctness of the decision-making process - petitioner has not made out a case, to secure any relief as is sought for in the writ petition
Result: Petition dismissed
JUDGMENT :
1. Instant Public Interest Litigation is filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to fix and publish the rate of vaccine in Kerala for the COVID-19 for Non eligible category, based on their annual Income.”
2. Short facts leading to filing of the writ petition are that, petitioner is a lawyer by profession. She has filed this public interest writ petition seeking interference of this Court, on a decision taken by the respondents, which according to her, is in total violation of the concept of a welfare State and principles of good governance. Petitioner has also stated that while providing free vaccination to the entire citizens, irrespective of their economic status, it would cause huge debt to the State Exchequer, which has to be compensated by the poor and weaker sections of the society.
3. Petitioner has further stated that the State of Kerala represented by the Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram, respondent No. 2, has taken a decision to obtain One Crore vaccine for COVID-19 disease from the companies, on payment of cost, which is fixed as Rs. 400/- per dose, for all the citizens free of cost and further, to distribute it among the entire citizens of the State, at a cost of Rs. 1,300/- Crores.
4. Petitioner has further stated that the decision to vaccinate all the citizens free, by spending huge amounts is nothing, but for political gain, at the cost of debt to each citizen. The demography based on the financial status of the State would clearly indicate that about 50% of the total population can afford the expense of vaccination themselves. Thus, half of the amounts spent on vaccines can be saved for other public good. However, the respondents have decided to vaccinate all, free, at the cost of the people's money, virtually denying the public benefits the taxpayers ought to have received with this money.
5. It is further stated that in the present scenario, this decision for free vaccination, when vaccines are in shortage and people are running around, should have been avoided. The vaccines that are being imported with Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and the 1st respondent's consent, ought to have been made available in public markets for the economically capable group to use it. This could allow the poorer section to have access to the vaccine with ease.
6. Petitioner has also stated that since the second wave of COVID-19 Pandemic is in progress and a third wave is expected by October, 2021, it is the duty of the respondents to ensure that all the citizens are vaccinated at least once before such time. According to the petitioner, this can be achieved only if, imported vaccines are made available in the market. However, if free vaccines are available for all sections of the society, it is seldom that people will opt for costly vaccines. Thus, according to the petitioner, there will be huge crowding for the free vaccine and no purpose will be served by imported vaccine, and the number of non vaccinated citizens will remain high. This would adversely affect the health of the citizens and in controlling the pandemic, which may outgrow drastically in the entire society by then.
7. Petitioner has further stated that the respondents ought to have considered the fact that if free vaccines are given, the same can be done only through proper Government machinery. Considering the large population of our country, it will be a herculean task to vaccinate all with the available vaccine produced in India, by the Serum Institute and Bharat Bio-Tech. The respondents will be forced to rely on proven foreign vaccines. The foreign vaccine will be very costly and it will increas
BALCO Employees' Union (Regd.) vs. Union of India
Bhavesh D. Parish and Others vs. Union of India and Another
Manohar Lal Sharma vs. Union of India
Narmada Bachao Andolan vs. Union of India
Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. vs. RBI
R. vs. Secy. of State for Home Department, Ex p Brind
Tata Cellular vs. Union of India
State of Himachal Pradesh and Another vs. Padam Dev and Others
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.