Putting the Government in a tight spot, the Supreme Court on Monday asked the Centre if it had taken a decision against giving `4 lakh ex-gratia to the next of kin of Covid victims. And if it did, the SC not only sought to see the decision but also know the authority who took it.
“Where is the decision that there is no need for ex-gratia,” the vacation bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan and M R Shah asked adding if the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), headed by the Prime Minister, had taken the decision.
The apex court was hearing a PIL on Centre’s decision to stop paying ex-gratia, following which the Government filed an affidavit stating that it cannot pay the compensation to families of COvid victims due to financial constraints.
Having received flak for its blunt ‘no’ to compensation to kin of Covid victims, the Centre on Monday clarified in the Supreme Court that it does have funds but its focus is on aspects like food security, public health interventions and reviving the economy. This led the Supreme Court to caution the Centre: “The Government saying it has no money has very wide repercussions.”
The contents of the Government’s affidavit explaining its financial priorities was twisted and misrepresented on Twitter, the Centre pointed out. “It is not the case of government that we don't have money. Our focus on expenditure of the money is on a holistic solution,” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said.
The SC also took up the matter of death certificates to Covid victims. The Court asked whether there can be some measures so to as to simplify the process of obtaining the certificates and also to ensure that those who have been issued such certificates where COVID was not mentioned, can avail a correction.
Senior advocate S B Upadhyay, appearing for a petitioner, asked if the Centre has money then why is it not complying with the statutory obligations under Section 12 of the Disaster Management Act (DMA) stipulating ex-gratia of Rs 4 lakh as the Government has declared Covid a national disaster. Under the law, the Centre must have a compensation scheme and the amount of Rs 4 lakh was not so important, Upadhyay said.
The bench, however, said: “Every disaster is different. There can be small and big pandemics. Or a big flood or small food. If the standard or gravity of a pandemic is more, then you cannot say that the same standard can be applied for every disaster.”
The apex court is hearing two separate pleas filed by lawyers Reepak Kansal and Gaurav Kumar Bansal respectively seeking directions to the Centre and the states to provide Rs 4 lakh compensation to the families of coronavirus victims as provisioned under the Act, and a uniform policy for issuing death certificates.
The special vacation bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan and M R Shah reserved the verdict on the two pleas.
Observing that the Finance Commission's recommendations on dealing with disasters cannot override statutory schemes on compensation under Section 12 of the DMA, the bench asked the
Centre “whether the National Disaster Management Authority, chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has taken any decision that no compensation should be given as ex-gratia”. Mehta said he was not aware of any such decision by the NDMA.