Back
2020 Supreme(Mad) 687
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.P. SAHI, SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, JJ.
S. Aravind – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Chennai – Respondent
W.P. No. 10979 of 2020
Decided on : 18-08-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :S. Sendamarai Kannan, Advocate.
For the Respondent: V. Jayaprakash Narayanan, State Government Pleader.
The implementation of the e-pass system was found to be in line with the Disaster Management Act, 2005 directives and the guidelines for controlling the spread of Coronavirus.
Headnote:
e-pass system - Freedom of Movement - Disaster Management Act, 2005, Section 10(2)(1) - Guidelines for Phased Re-opening (Unlock 3) - G.O.Ms.No.396, dated 31.7.2020 - G.O.Ms.No.396, dated 14.8.2020
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition challenging the e-pass system imposed by the State Government, alleging that it violated the freedom of movement and contravened the directives of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the e-pass system did not contravene the guidelines issued by the National Disaster Management Authority and was implemented to regulate movement and control the spread of Coronavirus.
Issues: Violation of freedom of movement, Contravention of Disaster Management Act, 2005 directives
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the e-pass system did not restrict or prohibit movement but regulated the movement of the public to control the spread of Coronavirus, in line with the guidelines issued by the National Disaster Management Authority.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the court found no grounds for declaring the e-pass system void or unconstitutional.
JUDGMENT :
A.P. Sahi, J.
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Declaration to declare that (i) the order issued by the State of Tamil Nadu vide G.O.Ms.No.396, dated 31.7.2020, to the extent that it mandates e-passes for inter-state and intra-state movement is void ab initio and unconstitutional for being passed in violation of Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution and Section 10(2)(1) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005; and (ii) in accordance with the orders of the National Disaster Management Authority, there shall be no requirement to obtain e-passes for inter-state and intrastate movement of people and goods in the State of Tamil Nadu.)
1. This public interest litigation has been filed contending that people like the petitioner, who is a driver, are facing immense problems resulting in breach of their fundamental right of movement by the enforcement of the e-pass system by the State Government, which amounts to a contravention of the directives issued by the Central Government in terms of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The submission is that the directives of the State Government itself under G.O. (Ms.) No.396, Revenue and Disaster Management (D.M.II) Department, dated 31.7.2020 states that the directives are being notified also keeping in view the order of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, dated 29.7.2020. It is, therefore, urged that if orders issued under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 by the National Disaster Management Authority categorically recites that there shall be no restriction on inter-State and intra-State movement of persons, then in that event, compelling the petitioner and other citizens to obtain e-passes amounts to restricting the freedom of movement and, hence, such a condition should be quashed.
2. On the other hand, Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, learned State Government Pleader has informed the Court that the system of issuance of e-passes has been relaxed under the notification dated 14.8.2020 and, therefore, the contention that there is a prohibition or a restriction on movement is unfounded. It is urged that in order to regulate movement, the State Government has issued the modified notifications, which are in consonance with the directives issued by the National Disaster Management Authority.
3. The order dated 29.7.2020 issued by the National Disaster Management Authority is accompanied by the guidelines that are described as “Guidelines for Phased Re-opening (Unlock 3)”. The relevant clause for the present purpose is Clause (5), which is extracted herein under:
“5. States/UTs, based on their assessment of the situation, may prohibit certain activities made outside the Containment zones, or impose such restrictions as deemed necessary.
However, there shall be no restriction on inter-State and intra-State movement of persons and goods including those for cross land-border trade under Treaties with neighbouring countries. No separate permission/approval/e-permit will be required for such movements.”
4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner about the offending provision in the Government Order dated 31.7.2020 relating to e-pass system is extracted herein under:
“E-pass system
E-Pass system will continue to be in force for both inter state and inter-district travel.”
5. On a perusal of the provisions aforesaid, we are satisfied that the words “no restriction” in Clause (5) of the Guidelines issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, does not in any way get contravened by a regulatory method of issuing of e-passes, which neither restricts, nor prohibits the movement, and rather regulates the movement of travelling public in order to control the spread of Coronavirus. The relevant clause, which is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner to be offending, categorically states that the e-pass system will continue to operate, but it nowhere states that no e-pass will be issued for an app
