Supreme Court Pulls Up States Over Laxity In Processing COVID Death Compensation Claims; Directs Them To Give Wide Publicity For Scheme

The Supreme Court on Monday expressed concern regarding the lackadaisical attitude of some of the States in disbursal of the ex-gratia compensation to the family of COVID victims in compliance with the slew of directions issued by the Apex Court on 4th October, 2021. On perusal of the affidavit/status reports filed by the States, a Bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna was displeased with the manner in which the States are dealing with the disbursal process of the ex-gratia payments. It is pertinent to mention, that out of all the affidavits filed by the States, the Court took up the affidavits of five States, namely, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat, while assuring that the others would be taken up for consideration on the next date of hearing i.e. 10th December. MaharashtraThe Counsel for the State of Maharashtra informed the Court that they have filed a compliance affidavit. The Bench enquired, "In how many cases have you paid compensation?" The Counsel responded, "More than one lakh profiles are being processed now." The Bench wanted the Counsel to show from the affidavit the figure that he had stated before the Court, to which the Counsel retorted that the same was not available in the compliance affidavit as the numbers are increasing with every passing day. Dissatisfied with the response, the Bench remarked, "As of today we can get, we cannot count for the future. You are hiding something Mister." In his attempt to clarify, the Counsel stated that on the date of filling of the affidavit, the number was a little more than 12,000, but the latest projection is more than 1 lakh. "On the date of filing it was 12,000 plus. Today it is more than 1 lakh."Concerned about the low number of claims, the Bench asked the Counsel, "Why 12,000 only when there is a reported death of one lakh?" The Court was informed that the portal was set up only on 01.12.2021. Quite perturbed, the Bench stated, "After we take up the matter, you will do certain things?...When did we pass an order?" The Counsel humbly submitted that some time was required to set up the portal, to which the Bench remarked - "Portal can be done within one week Mister. Or within 2 days, like Gujarat had done now." It further enquired - "Where is the grievance redressal committee constituted, show us." As the Counsel pointed out the relevant paragraph from the affidavit, the Bench asked him to take it to the format in which the application is to be made. " Where is the form for application for compensation?" Informing the Court that the said format was not available the Counsel sought permission to file an additional affidavit. Irked, the Bench commented, "Then what affidavit have you filed?" The Counsel emphasised on the point that the State had complied with the earlier order of the Court. The Bench stated, "This is no compliance" and asked the Counsel to show the format from the record. As the Counsel again sought time to file the same, in a fit of pique, the Bench stated - "You, keep it in your pocket and give it to your Chief Minister." The Bench added - "Even as per the affidavit not a single person has been paid the compensation. You say that it will be paid." The Counsel informed the Court that the payment would be paid within 30 days of receiving the applications. But the Court was not happy that the State was waiting for 30 days to disburse the payments. "Why are you waiting 30 days?" The Counsel responded, "For cross-referencing. We had filed the affidavit on 03.12.2021, as of then 12000 applications were filed." Displeased, the Bench stated - "According to this you will pay in Jan, 2022, because 30 days to be considered from the date of portal. This is absolutely ridiculous. We are not at all happy with this affidavit filed by the State of Maharashtra? You should not have waited till the date of portal, you could have taken it manually also." At this juncture, the Bench asked if the Counsel was Mr. Sachin Patil who is to represent the State of Maharashtra. "Are you Sachin Patil?" The response was, "No Milords, he is held up before Court 3 in a part heard matter." The Bench expressed its intention to reprimand the State if Mr. Patil does not appear before it. "You call him or we will pass strictures against the State of Maharashtra." The Bench started dictating its order - "We are not at all satisfied with the compliance affidavit filed by the State of Maharashtra. This court passed a detailed judgment directing all states including State of Maharashtra to provide compensation to kin or family members of persons who have died due to Covid 19...In the affidavit it is reported that 1lakh 45 thousand 25 deaths were recorded as on 02.12.2021 and 12,000 claim forms are received as on 03.12.2021 on the online portal." As Mr. Sachin...

Supreme Court Pulls Up States Over Laxity In Processing COVID Death Compensation Claims; Directs Them To Give Wide Publicity For Scheme

Sohini Chowdhury

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sohini Chowdhury

Supreme Court Pulls Up States Over Laxity In Processing COVID Death Compensation Claims; Directs Them To Give Wide Publicity For Scheme

Sohini Chowdhury

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sohini Chowdhury

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers