Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S. Manikumar, Shaji P.Chaly, JJ.
Jayananda K.R. – Petitioner
Versus
Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi and ors. – Respondents
WP(C) No. 16833 & 17071 of 2021
Decided On : 28-09-2021
Constitution of India,1950 - Articles 19(1)(g), 21, 14, 19 , 21 , 226 , and 301 - Disaster Management Act, 2005 - Sections 10(2), 50 to 60 and 6(2) (i) - Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 188 - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 144 - Possession of Covid vaccination certificate - Right to free movement is restricted - Whether in instant case Calcutta High Court had jurisdiction to entertain and decide Writ Petition in question even - Alleged must depend upon whether averments are sufficient in law to establish that a part of cause of action had arisen within jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate District Collector Office 3 and 4 respectively, in imposing illegal conditions violating fundamental rights of the people residing at the border towns of, stating that all passengers shall carry RT-PCR negative certificate, in addition to Covid vaccination certificate issued by Government, for entering into State of Karnataka - petitioner, curtailed fundamental rights of people in Kerala, predominantly the people residing - People residing in are mainly depending upon Mangalore city, as it is only 15 kilometres away from border town, and after passing of Exhibit-P1 order - Travelers, including labourers, employees and students, studying at various medical colleges are being deprived of their right to travel on daily basis - Business activities done by residents of border towns of Kasaragod are now being stopped, due to issuance of the impugned order - There was an earlier decision taken by 3rd respondent that no RT-PCR report is needed for travelers.
Finding of the Court:
Objection of lack of territorial jurisdiction the court must take all the facts pleaded in support of the cause of action into consideration albeit without embarking upon an enquiry as to the correctness or otherwise of the said facts - Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain a Writ Petition must be answered on basis of the averments made in petition truth or otherwise whereof being immaterial – Court have no hesitation to hold that the petitioners have failed to establish territorial jurisdiction of this Court in interfering with circulars issued by State of Karnataka.
Result: Writ petitions are dismissed
JUDGMENT :
S. Manikumar, J.
Seeking for a direction to the respondents, to allow the passengers having Covid vaccination certificate for at least one dose, to enter the State of Karnataka, to remove the restrictions imposed by the 3rd respondent, viz., State of Karnataka, represented by its Chief Secretary, Bangalore, to permit entry from the State of Kerala and reopen all the borders of the State of Karnataka connecting the State of Kerala, W.P. (C) No.16833 of 2021 is filed with the following reliefs :
(ii) Direct the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to take necessary steps under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, to ensure that all the vehicles, including passenger vehicles, to the State of Karnataka, shall not be obstructed in the borders of State of Karnataka, in the light of Exhibit P1 order passed by the 4th respondent dated 31.07.2021 imposing a condition that the passenger must be in possession of an RT-PCR negative certificate even though the passenger is in possession of Covid vaccination certificate of at least one dose of vaccination.”
2. W.P.(C) No.17071 of 2021 is filed challenging the requirement of mandatory RT-PCR certificate insisted by the State of Karnataka, irrespective of having been vaccinated. The reliefs sought for in the writ petition are as under:
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, orders or direction, commanding the 1st respondent to open the borders with Kerala and in particular Kasaragod-Mangalore border at Thalappady.
(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, orders or direction, directing the 1st respondent, to ensure free movement of daily commuters, who have taken at least 1st dose of Covid vaccine, through the borders, without possessing a negative RT-PCR Certificate taken within 72 hours.
3. Facts relevant for consideration are that the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.16833 of 2021 is the Secretary of Rastrakavi Manjeshwara Govinda Pai Smaraka Samithi, a trust operating in the District of Kasaragod. He is also a member of the Kasaragod Legal Aid Committee and a member of the District Tourism Promotion Council, Kasaragod.
4. Petitioner is challenging the arbitrary action of the State of Karnataka, Bangalore, Rep; by Chief Secretary, and Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate, Dakshina Kannada District, District Collector Office, Mangalore, Karnataka-575001, respondents 3 and 4 respectively, in imposing illegal conditions violating the fundamental rights of the people residing at the border towns of Kasaragod, stating that all the passengers shall carry RT-PCR negative certificate, in addition to the Covid vaccination certificate issued by the Government, for entering into the State of Karnataka, and thereby all entries and passages from the State of Kerala to the State of Karnataka through Kasaragod District are blocked. This, according to the petitioner, curtailed the fundamental rights of the people in Kerala, predominantly the people residing in Kasaragod.
5. Petitioner has further stated that the people residing in Kasaragod are mainly depending upon Ma
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
