Plea Before Kerala High Court Challenges GO Restricting Entry Of Unvaccinated Persons To Shops And Other Establishments

Hannah M Varghese

7 Aug 2021 5:44 PM IST

  • Plea Before Kerala High Court Challenges GO Restricting Entry Of Unvaccinated Persons To Shops And Other Establishments

    A writ petition has been filed before the Kerala High Court challenging the recent Government Order issued by the State which imposed restrictions on unvaccinated persons. The State government had on 4th August issued an order under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, relaxing the Covid1-9 restrictions imposed in the State. Clause IV of the said order reads as such: "Only a person who has...

    A writ petition has been filed before the Kerala High Court challenging the recent Government Order issued by the State which imposed restrictions on unvaccinated persons.  

    The State government had on 4th August issued an order under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, relaxing the Covid1-9 restrictions imposed in the State. Clause IV of the said order reads as such: 

    "Only a person who has taken at least one dose of Covid-19 vaccine before two weeks, or who are in possession of RT-PCR negative certificate taken 72 hours before or who is in possession of Covid-19 positive result more than a month old will be allowed inside (workers/visitors) in shops, markets, banks, public and private offices, financial institutions, factories, industrial establishment, open tourist spaces, and other establishments."

    This specific clause is challenged in the petition on the ground that it is arbitrary and is against the provisions of Articles 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

    The petitioner is a patient with a drug allergy and suffers from frequent allergic reactions. He submits that he can take medicines only after checking for possible allergic reactions by administering a test dose of that medicine. 

    According to him, he had requested hospital authorities to administer a test dose of the vaccine to check for any allergic reactions. However, the authorities allegedly rejected his request stating that they had not received any guidelines or direction from either the State or the Centre regarding the administration of vaccination in drug allergic patients.

    Therefore, for this reason, he is still unvaccinated. The petitioner argued that this delay in giving him a test dose of the vaccine is absolutely illegal and unjustifiable. The right to health flows directly from the Right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, he asserted.

    It was also submitted that he stays alone in his apartment, implying he does not have vaccinated members in his residence to get him groceries and other basic needs. 

    This means that Clause IV would virtually put the petitioner and other unvaccinated persons under house arrest in violation of Article 21 while others who got the 1st dose of their vaccine are allowed to leave their houses /compounds. Therefore, he alleged that this clause is arbitrary and unsustainable in law. 

    He further contended that the clause discriminates between a vaccinated and unvaccinated person and thereby violating the fundamental right to life and livelihood of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution. 

    Moreover, it was also pointed out that not even 50% of the population in the State are vaccinated. He alleged that it was the government that miserably failed by not completing its vaccination drive, and the unvaccinated citizens cannot be discriminated against arbitrarily for not taking the vaccine.

    The petitioner argued that the Disaster Management Act. as is evident from its preamble. is made to provide effective management of the disasters and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. Therefore, he took the stance that the present restriction was arbitrary and unsustainable in law.

    "Similarly Right to Vaccine emanates from the constitutionally guaranteed right to health under Art 21. The Right to vaccine in the current context of Covid 19 Pandemic can be undoubtedly proclaimed to be the subset of right to health," the plea reads. 

    On these grounds, the interference of the Court was warranted. 

    The petitioner has prayed that the said Order be quashed and that the allegedly unreasonable restrictions imposed on the unvaccinated are a violation of Articles 14 19 and 21. It was further prayed that a declaration be made that the State cannot impose restrictions violating the said provisions.

     He also sought a directive to the State to administer a test dose of the vaccine to him a 


    Case Title: Pauly Vadakan v. State of Kerala & Ors

    Click Here To Read The Petition



    Next Story