Petitions sought entry into Karnataka without negative RT-PCR certificates for vaccinated travellers from Kerala. The Court held that no part of the cause of action arose within Kerala and dismissed both petitions for want of territorial jurisdiction, leaving the reasonableness of the restrictions to the jurisdictional High Court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 6TH ASWINA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 16833 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
JAYANANDA K.R., AGED 53 YEARS, S/O. RAMAPPA, MITHA KANILA HOUSE, BANGRA, MANJESHWAR, KASARGOD DISTRICT, PIN-671 323.
BY ADVS. SHRI P.V.ANOOP
SHRI PHIJO PRADEESH PHILIP
SHRI M. P. PRIYESHKUMAR
SHRI K. V. SREERAJ
RESPONDENTS:
4 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, DISTRICT COLLECTOR OFFICE, BUNDER, MANGALORE, KARNATAKA 575 001. [email protected]
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:2:
5 STATE OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY. [email protected]
6 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARGODE DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION, VIDYANAGAR, KASARAGOD, PIN-671 123. [email protected]
8 KERALA STATE DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY VIKAS BHAVAN, P.O. OBSERVATORY HILLS, OPPOSITE KANAKAKKUNNU PALACE, NANTHANCODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 033. REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN. [email protected]
R1, R2 & R7 BY ADVS. SRI. P. VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA
SRI. JAISHANKAR V. NAIR, CGC
R3 & R4 BY ADV. SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADGI, ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR KARNATAKA
DR. M. RAJENDRA KUMAR, CGC
R5, R6 & R8 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADERS SRI. V. MANU SRI. T.B. HOOD
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C). NO.17071/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:3:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 6TH ASWINA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 17071 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
A.K.M ASHRAF, AGED 43 YEARS,
MANJESWARAM MLA, SON OF ABBOBACKER, CEEYEM MINNATH, NEAR KADAMBAR SCHOOL, KADAMBAR, KERALA-671 323.
BY ADVS. SRI. HARIS BEERAN
SRI. O. A. NURIYA SRI. AZHAR ASSEES
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, DELHI-110 001.
R1 BY ADVS. SRI. P. VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG
SRI. JAISHANKAR V. NAIR
R2 BY ADV. SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADGI, ADVOCATE GENERAL, KARNATAKA DR. M. RAJENDRA KUMAR, CGC
R3 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADERS SRI. V. MANU & SRI. T.B. HOOD
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).16833/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:4:
“C.R”
JUDGMENT
S. Manikumar, CJ
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:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:5:
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.”
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:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:6:
borders, without possessing a negative RT-PCR Certificate taken within 72 hours.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:7:
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.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:8:
the State of Karnataka, who have taken at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccination till 31.07.2021, the date of Exhibit-P1 order. In order to substantiate the said contention, petitioner has invited our attention to Exhibit-P2, a news item published in the New Indian Express dated 2.7.2021.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:9:
vehicles from State of Kerala to Karnataka, in strict adherence to Covid protocol.
blockade created by the 2nd respondent, viz., State of Karnataka. As per the Karnataka Government's latest regulation, all the passengers from Kerala are required to possess a negative RT-PCR certificate taken within 72 hours. Even people who have taken two doses of COVID-19 vaccine are required to undergo the test.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:10:
of Kasaragod in Kerala, who regularly visit Dakshina Kannada in Karnataka, for educational, medical and business purposes. It is also stated that the people of Manjeshwar Constituency are dependent on Dakshina Kannada districts/ Mangalore city for their basic needs. They are aggrieved by the arbitrary decision of the Karnataka Government in the order dated 1.7.2021, since Dakshina Kannada districts are just within 10 to 20 kms. in distance. That apart, most people of Kasaragod, which is very near to the Karnataka border, predominantly depend on Mangalore for their education, trade, business, jobs and for urgent medical treatment, which is the nearest available medical hub to Kasaragod. Hence, the petitioner has contended that the action of the State in issuing the impugned order, is in total disregard to Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:11:
state and intra-State movement of persons and goods, including
those for cross land border trade under treaties with neighbouring countries and that no separate permission/ approval/e-permit is required for such movements. The said order has been updated timely to ensure smooth running of the economy even though strict measures have been issued to contain spread of COVID-19 by the 1st respondent.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:12:
and vide order dated 1.4.2021 in W.P.(C) No.3949 of 2021, the Court has directed the State of Karnataka that no restriction on the movement of people or goods will be imposed on the check posts between Kerala and Karnataka. Thereafter, Indian Council of Medical Research has issued an advisory dated 4.5.2021 for COVID-19 testing during the second wave of pandemic.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:13:
uninterrupted inter-State transportation of passengers, patients and commodities between Karnataka and Kerala.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:14:
stating that people travelling from Kerala and Maharashtra to Karnataka districts must produce a negative RT-PCR Certificate, which is not older than 72 hours, irrespective of the vaccination status. Petitioner has contended that Exhibit-P10 and ExhibitP12 revised circular dated 31.07.2021 issued by the State of Karnataka, infringe the fundamental rights under Articles 19(1) (g) and 21 of the people of State of Kerala and that their right to free movement is restricted. According to the petitioner, Manjeshwar is at a distance of 30 kms from the city of Mangalore and majority of the people depend on Mangalore for medical facilities, education, business and other livelihoods.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:15:
directions. In the present case, Exhibit-P10 and P12 dated 31.07.2021 issued by the State of Karnataka are contrary to the directions issued by the Union of India and therefore, the said circulars may not be implemented as they infringe Articles 19(1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India.
Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Anr. [(1996) 4 SCC 37], to establish his contentions.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:16:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:17:
the cause of action must wholly or in part arise within the territorial limits of the Court's jurisdiction. In this context, he has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Nawal Kishore Sharma v. Union of India and Others [(2014) 9 SCC 329].
C. According to the State of Karnataka, it cannot be gainsaid that respondents 3 and 4 are functionaries, who fall within the territorial limits of Karnataka State, and therefore, fall outside the limit of this Court's territorial jurisdiction. Pertinently, the cause of action in respect of the legal rights that are alleged to have been infringed arise wholly within the State of Karnataka, as the requirement for production of a mandatory RT-PCR test, which forms the cause of action, is being enforced within the territorial limits of the State of Karnataka and not in Kerala. To put it otherwise, petitioner claims that his legal rights are infringed by the actions of the State of Karnataka, insofar as it restricts his entry into the State, without production of negative RT-PCR certificate. Therefore, an infringement of the petitioner's legal right, if any would occur wholly within the State of Karnataka and not in Kerala, as the respondents are not imposing the requirement for production of an RT-PCR certificate
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:18:
for his movement within the State of Kerala, but only for his entry in the State of Karnataka.
D. It was further contended that similar prayers were sought against the authorities of State of Karnataka in W.P.(C) (TMP) No.2 of 2020, wherein this Court in its order dated 1.4.2020 has observed that we are well aware of our jurisdictional limitations and we, therefore, do not propose to issue any direction to the State of Karnataka. Therefore, this Court previously in similar circumstances, has taken note of the Constitutional limitations on its jurisdiction under Article 226 and observed that it does not propose to issue any directions to the State of Karnataka. The prayers sought for in this writ petition against the State of Karnataka are, therefore, not maintainable as they are beyond the scope of this Court's jurisdiction and hence, liable to be rejected in limine .
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:19:
upon, irrespective of the vaccination status of the person arriving in Karnataka. The TAC specifically observed in the meeting that, as vaccination does not prevent infection in the vaccinated persons (one of two doses), negative RT-PCR test reports must be insisted upon from all the persons arriving in Karnataka, irrespective of vaccination status.
F. It is further contended that thereafter, at the 116th meeting of the TAC on 24.07.2021, the committee reiterated the need for insisting upon production of a negative RT-PCR test report from all the persons arriving from Kerala and Maharashtra, irrespective of vaccination status and even if they are asymptomatic. The TAC also noted that the above requirement is recommended in view of the magnitude of COVID-19 cases in the States of Kerala and Maharashtra, and that the requirement may be reviewed in due course after the situation improves in the two States. Thereafter, in the 117th meeting on 30.07.2021, the TAC, inter alia, has discussed in detail, the TPR prevailing in each of the State's districts, as well as that prevailing in the State of Kerala and Maharashtra.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:20:
situation in the State, the State of Karnataka issued the revised circular dated 31.07.2021, which set out various special surveillance measures to be complied with strictly by the State functionaries with respect to arrival of persons from the States of Maharashtra and Kerala.
H. Further, it is contended that the TAC, in its 120th meeting held on 15.08.2021 [Exhibit-R3(f)], discussed in detail the justification for compulsory RT-PCR testing of persons coming from Kerala, irrespective of vaccination status. A reading of the said proceedings revealed that the TAC has considered the TPRs in each of the districts in the State, the number of daily COVID-19 cases registered in Kerala and Karnataka, and the high incidence of COVID-19 cases in the districts bordering Kerala. It was upon careful consideration of all the data available that the TAC has reiterated its recommendation for mandatory production of RT-PCR test report, irrespective of vaccination status. Pertinently, the TAC has also reiterated that the requirement of production of negative RT-PCR reports will be reviewed after the number of Covid19 cases in Kerala decline. Therefore, it is clear that the requirement for production of negative RT-PCR test reports is only a temporary measure, which will
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:21:
be reviewed by the State of Karnataka after the Covid-19 situation in Kerala improves and the spread of the virus has been effectively contained. In this regard, it is contended that the temporary measures that have now been imposed by the State of Karnataka are absolutely essential in order to contain the spread of the pandemic.
I. It is further contended that the TAC, in its Meeting on 15.08.2021, has also noted that during the beginning of the second wave, arrival of persons from Kerala triggered the spurt in the number of cases, and that these temporary measures that have currently been imposed are essential to ensure that this spurt is not repeated once again. Therefore, it is submitted that the requirements imposed vide the Circular dated 31.07.2021 are critical to ensure that the pandemic is contained.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:22:
Importantly, these measures not only aid the State of Karnataka in fighting the pandemic but also the country as a whole, as allowing the virus to spread in one State would consequently result in a cascading effect where the virus spreads to other States. In fact, this is precisely how the deadly second wave spread across the country in the summer of 2021, and it is absolutely critical that the same is not allowed to be repeated again.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:23:
and baseless. In this regard, it is contended that in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 6(2) (i) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, the NDMA issued an order dated 29.04.2021, inter alia, setting out ‘various measures for containing the spread of the Covid-19 pandemic. The petitioners rely upon the mandate in para 6(ix) of Annexure A to the order, which states that there shall be no restriction on interstate movement of persons and goods. The reliance placed in this regard is, however, entirely misplaced as the State of Karnataka has placed no restrictions whatsoever on the interstate movement of either persons or goods. It is reiterated that the measures set out in the Circular dated 31.07.2021 do not place any restrictions on the movement of persons or goods into the State of Karnataka. All the borders between the two States are free for movement of persons and goods, thereby complying with the requirements of the mandate of the NDMA. The prescription for production of a negative RT-PCR certificate can hardly be said to be a restriction that falls foul of the NDMA’s mandate. As submitted earlier, the requirement only aids the process of detection and containment of the Covid-19 virus.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:24:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:25:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:26:
cause of action has arisen within the State of Kerala, in as much as the said circulars have put fetters on the fundamental rights of the people of Kerala.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:27:
of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, which clearly specifies that there shall be no restrictions on inter-State transport.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:28:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:29:
India, which is not limited to the borders of any State, but to the contrary it grants liberty to any citizen to travel throughout the country without any unreasonable restrictions by any State Government, and therefore, it was submitted that the impugned circulars so far as interfering with the rights and liberties conferred on the citizens cannot be curtailed.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:30:
that petitioners were not right in contending that the part of cause of action has arisen within the State of Kerala. According to the learned Advocate General, orders are passed by the State of Karnataka to regulate and restrict the movements within the State of Karnataka and it is implemented only within the State of Karnataka. Learned Advocate General also submitted that the State of Karnataka and its officials have never entered the borders of State of Kerala and implemented any restrictions imposed under the circulars in question.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:31:
they were issued with the hopeful intention to curb or control the disease within the respective States.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:32:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:33:
territories, and the said situation definitely would have some effect on the rights and privileges enjoyed by the citizens. But, the fact remains, every State Government would implement its order only within their territory and if at all, the action of the State Government is to be challenged, it can only be done in the Courts within the territorial limits of that State alone.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:34:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:35:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:36:
circulars/guidelines issued by the State of Karnataka and Government of India also.
by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi, is reproduced hereunder:
“ No. 40-3/2020-DM-I(A) Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs
North Block, New Delhi-110001 Dated: 29th August, 2020
ORDER
Whereas, an Order of even number dated 29.07.2020 was issued for containment of COVID-19 in the country, for a period upto 31.08.2020;
Whereas, in exercise of the powers under section 6(2)(i) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) has directed. the undersigned to issue an order to re-open more activities in areas outside the Containment Zones and to extend the lockdown in Containment Zones upto 30.09.2020;
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:37:
Now therefore, in exercise of the powers, conferred under Section 10(2)(1) of the Disaster Management Act 2005, the undersigned hereby directs that guidelines on Unlock 4, as annexed, will be in force upto 30.09.2020.
Guidelines for Phased Re-opening (Unlock 4)
[As per Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Order No.403/2020-DM-I(A) dated 29th August, 2020]
xx xxx xxxx
5. No restriction on Inter-State and intra-State movement
There shall be no restriction on inter-State and intraState 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.
xx xxx xxxx xxxxxxxx”
by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi, is reproduced hereunder:
“ No. 40-3/2020-DM-I(A) Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs
North Block, New Delhi-110001 Dated 29th April, 2021
ORDER
Whereas, an Order of even number dated 23.03.2021 was issued for effective control of COVID-19 in the country, for a period upto 30.04.2021;
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:38:
And whereas, considering the unprecedented surge in COVID-19 cases across the country, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MoHFW) vide DO No. Z.28015/85/2021-DM Cell dated 25th April 2021, has issued an advisory to all States and Union Territories (UTs), for implementing intensive, local and focused containment framework, in specific districts/ cities, areas, identified based on a prescribed criterion;
Whereas, in exercise of the powers under Section 6(2)(i) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) has directed the undersigned to issue an order, for ensuring compliance on the focused containment measures, as mentioned in the aforesaid MoHFW letter dated 25.04.2021, for containment of COVID-19 in the country;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers, conferred under Section 10(2)(1) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, the undersigned, hereby directs the State/Union Territory Governments and State/ Union Territory Authorities to consider the containment measures for COVID-19, as conveyed vide aforesaid MQHFW advisory dated 25.04.2021, as per Annexure-I, for immediate implementation in their State/ UT, based on the assessment of the situation, until 31.05.2021. States/UTs, will take the necessary containment measures, under the relevant provisions of the Disaster Management Act 2005. It is further directed that:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:39:
Union Home Secretary and, Chairman, National Executive Committee (NEC)
Containment framework, as mentioned in Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MoHFW), DO No. Z.28015/ 85/2021-DM Cell dated 25th April, 2021
Annexure – A
Implementation Framework for community containment/large containment areas
xx xxx xxxxx
A. Containment
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:40:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:41:
xx xxx xxxxxxxx”
“Date: 04/05/2021
Advisory for COVID-19 testing during the second wave of the pandemic Context
An unprecedented upsurge of COVID-19 cases and deaths is currently being witnessed across India. The overall nationwide test positivity rate is above 20%. Testingtracking-tracing, isolation and home-based treatment of positive patients is the key measure to curb transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19. As on today, India has a total of 2506 molecular testing laboratories
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:42:
including RTPCR, TrueNat, CBNAAT and other platforms. The total daily National testing capacity is close to 15 lakh tests considering a three-shift operationalization of the existing laboratory network. At present, the laboratories are facing challenges to meet the expected testing target due to extraordinary case load and staff getting infected with COVID-19. In view of this situation, it is imperative to optimize the RTPCR testing and simultaneously increase the access and availability of testing to all citizens of the country.
Recommended measures to optimize RTPCR testing
i. RTPCR test must not be repeated in any individual who has tested positive once either by RAT or RTPCR.
ii. No testing is required for COVID-19 recovered individuals at the time of hospital discharge in accordance with the discharge policy of MoH&FW
iii. The need for RTPCR test in healthy individuals undertaking inter-state domestic travel may be completely removed to reduce the load on laboratories.
iv. Non-essential travel and interstate travel of symptomatic individuals (COVID-19 or flu like symptoms) should be essentially avoided to reduce the risk of infection.
v. All asymptomatic individuals undertaking essential travel must follow COVID appropriate behavior.
vi. Mobile testing laboratories are now available on GeM portal. States are encouraged to augment RTPCR testing through mobile systems.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:43:
Measures to improve access and availability of testing:
Rapid antigen tests (RATs) were recommended in India for COVID-19 testing in June Z020. However, the use of these tests is currently limited to containment zones and health care settings. RAT has a short turn-around time of 15-30 minutes and thus offers a huge advantage of quick detection of cases and opportunity to isolate and treat them early for curbing transmission. So far, ICMR has approved 36 RATs of which 10 are on the GeM portal. To meet the overwhelming testing demand, it will be prudent to upscale testing using RATs.
xx xxxx xxxxxxxx”
by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi, is reproduced hereunder:
“No. 40-3/2020-DM-I(A) Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs
North Block, New Delhi-110001 Dated: 29th June, 2021
ORDER
Whereas, an Order of even number dated 29th April 2021, was issued to ensure compliance to the containment measures for COVID-19, as conveyed vide Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MOHFW) DO No. Z.28015/85/
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:44:
2021-DM Cell dated 25th April 2021, which was further extended for a period upto 30.06.2021 vide an Order of even number dated 27.05.2021;
And whereas, considering the need for containment of COVID-19 cases across the country, MoHFW vide DO No. Z.28015/85/2021-DM Cell dated 28th June 2021, has issued an advisory to all States and Union Territories (UTs), for implementing targeted and prompt actions for bringing the pandemic under control;
Whereas, in exercise of the powers under section 6(2)(i) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) has directed the undersigned to issue an order, for containment of COVID19 in the country;
Now therefore, in exercise of the powers, conferred under Section 10(2)(1) of the Disaster Management Act 2005, the undersigned, hereby directs the State/Union Territory Governments and State/ Union Territory Authorities to consider implementation of targeted and prompt actions for COVID-19 management, as conveyed vide aforesaid MoHFW advisory dated 28.06.2021, as per Annexure-I, until 31.07.2021. States/ UTs, will take the necessary measures, under the relevant provisions of the Disaster Management Act 2005. It is further directed that:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:45:
Sd/-
Union Home Secretary
and, Chairman, National Executive Committee (NEC)”
ANNEXURE-I
D.O No. Z.28015/85/2021-DM Cell 28th June, 2021
This is in reference to my earlier DO letter of even number dated 25th April, 2021 wherein Ministry of Health and Family Welfare had shared with all States/UTs an implementation framework for intensive action and local containment in specific and well defined geographic units, to break and suppress the chain of transmission of SARS COV-2.This was also later reiterated by the Ministry of Home Affairs and orders regarding the same were issued under the DM Act, 2005 vide letter No. 40-3/2020-DM-l(A) dated 29th April, 2021.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:46:
implementation framework. As a result, the trajectory of COVID 19 pandemic in the country is presently showing a steady decline.
A. Guiding Principles
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:47:
Higher case positivity would imply the need for stringent containment and restrictions so as to control the spread of infection.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:48:
the Government of Karnataka is reproduced.
“Government of Karnataka
No. RD 158 TNR 2020
Karnataka Government Secretariat MS Building Bengaluru, Dated: 01-07-2021
ORDER
Subject: Special surveillance measures for persons arriving from Kerala - reg.
Reference: Proceedings of 112th meeting of State COVID 19 TAC, dated 20-06-2021.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:49:
Whereas, the State of Kerala continues to be threatened with the spread of COVID 19 virus. Further, INSACOG (a consortium of laboratories for whole Genome sequencing in the context of COVID 19 pandemic) has intimated that Delta Plus variant of COVID 19 virus, which is currently a Variant of Concern (COV), has been reported in certain districts of Kerala.
Whereas, the State Government is satisfied that prevailing COVID 19 situation in the Kerala, the neighbouring State, entails taking special surveillance measures to prevent the spread in to the bordering districts of the State.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred under the sub section (1) of Section 24 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, the undersigned, in the capacity of the Chairman, State Executive Committee, directs taking special surveillance measures, as below, for persons arriving from Kerala, with immediate effect, for strict implementation by Chief Commissioner BBMP, Police Commissioners, Deputy Commissioners, Superintendents of Police, and other Heads of Departments and Authorities.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:50:
possess RT-PCR negative certificates not older than 72 hours.
Permitted exemptions for negative RT-PCR certificate are as follows:
Any person violating these measures will be liable to be proceeded against as per the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases Act 2020, Disaster Management Act, 2005, besides legal action under relevant section of IPC, and other legal provisions as applicable.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:51:
Sd/-
Chief Secretary and Chairman State Executive Committee”
Advisory Committee dated 16.07.2021 is extracted hereunder:
“COVID - 19 : TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, KARNATAKA
Proceedings of the 115th meeting of State COVID-19 - Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), Dept. of Health & Family Welfare held on Friday, 16th July 2021 at 07:00 PM by ECHO Zoom Video conference.
Members
Special invitees :
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:52:
****
Dr. M. K. Sudarshan, Chairman TAC welcomed all the participants.
Agenda 1: Unlock 4.0 — TAC Guidelines
The TAC discussed in detail the current scenario of COVID19 in the state, TPR of the districts, etc. (Annexure-1) , COVID-19 situation in the neighbouring states of Kerala and Maharashtra, compliance to CAB in public places by the general population and the draft guidelines of unlock 4.0 (Annexure-2) . Though the TPR of Bengaluru Urban (1.4 crore) is 0.8% still due to poor compliance to CAB it was strongly recommended that this district shall also be included in the districts having >2%.
Agenda 2: SoP for medical examination of under fives - TAC recommendation
The SOP provided by the Department of Women and Children was shared in advance and discussed in the meeting. The following additional points are recommended to be included.
Agenda 3: SoP for Bakrid festival due on Wednesday, 21st July
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:53:
The SoP provided by the Department of Minorities was shared, discussed in the meeting and was found adequate. However, due care shall be taken to prevent crowding / congregation of people particularly in closed places.
Agenda 4: any other subjects
4.1: Insisting on negative RT-PCR test report irrespective of vaccination status of the person arriving in Karnataka
As vaccination does not prevent infection in the vaccinated person (one or two doses), after detailed deliberations, it was recommended to insist on a negative RT-PCR test report from all persons arriving in Karnataka irrespective of their vaccination status.
4.2: Providing COVID-19 treatment kits to infected persons under home isolation (adult and pediatric separately), and prophylactic kits to healthy family contacts (adult and pediatric separately).
The current guidelines of Govt. of India and others shall be reviewed and the contents of the kits will be given in the next meeting.
The Chairman-TAC thanked all the participants for their active participation.
Dr. Md. Shariff Dr. M.K. Sudarshan Member Secretary, Chairman, TAC, COVID-19 TAC COVID-19 16th July, 2021 16th July, 2021
Government of Kerala, Disaster Management (A) Department is
extracted hereunder:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:54:
“GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
Abstract
Disaster Management Department – COVID-19 – Containment activities in the State Exemption in Mandatory RT-PCR test negative result for interstate travels and for attending exams- Orders issued
DISASTER MANAGEMENT (A) DEPARTMENT
G.O(Rt.) No.530/2021/DMD
Dated, Thiruvananthapuram, 17/07/2021
Read: 1. G.O(Rt.) No.404/2021/DMD dated 06-05-2021 2. G.O(Rt.) No.455/2021/DMD dated 03-06-2021 3. G.O(Rt.) No.500/2021/DMD dated 06-07-2021 4. G.O(Rt.) No.524/2021/DMD dated 13-07-2021
ORDER
In connection with the COVID-19 containment activities in the State, it was inter alia decided as per the order read (2) above, to make RT-PCR test negative result mandatory for many activities including interstate travels and for attending exams.
Now, since the COVID-19 vaccination is progressing well, the undersigned, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 20(3) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, in his capacity as chairman of the State Executive Committee of the State Disaster Management Authority hereby orders that the RT-PCR test negative certificate is not required, for purposes wherever it is specified, for those persons who have taken two doses of vaccination while attending the activities for which RT-PCR certificate is
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:55:
made mandatory, including interstate travels. However, those who have developed symptoms of COVID shall undergo RT-PCR test and carry the negative result.
These orders shall come into force with immediate effect.
(By order of the Governor)
Dr. V P Joy Chief Secretary”
Advisory Committee dated 24.07.2021 is extracted hereunder:
“COVID - 19 : TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, KARNATAKA
Proceedings of the 116th meeting of State COVID-19 - Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), Dept. of Health & Family Welfare held on Saturday, 24th July 2021 at 07:00 PM by ECHO Zoom Video conference.
Members
of Respiratory medicine
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:56:
Special invitees :
Dr. M. K. Sudarshan, Chairman TAC welcomed all the participants.
Agenda 1: Revised guidelines of surveillance for interstate air travellers [Ref: Letter from Ms.Usha Padhee, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Civil Aviation, GOI dt. 16th July, 2021].
The TAC discussed in detail the current scenario of COVID19 in the state, neighbouring states of Kerala and Maharashtra and other states of India. TAC also considered - ”one nation - one rule" for domestic air travellers with reference to testing and vaccination status. The members recommended that as the magnitude of COVID-19 is still high in the states of Maharashtra and Kerala there cannot be any change in the recommendations of surveillance of travellers from these two states. Hence, it would be difficult to have a uniform guideline for all the states and union territories and more so when the COVlD-19- situation is quite dynamic in the country.
Generally air travel is safer due to short duration and better implementation of COVID-19 protocols. The members also opined that breakthrough infections are reported even in fully vaccinated persons. The TAC was of the opinion that the sensitivity of RAT (Coviself at home or RAT testing at airport) is poor in asymptomatics, and as such symptomatics are screened out at the airports by COVID-19 protocols. As a result there is no scope for RAT in screening of domestic passengers. Hence, RT-PCR shall continue to be the gold standard of COVID-19 testing for travellers.
The TAC also noted — the current guidelines of Govt. of Karnataka for interstate travellers, self-declaration of health
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:57:
by travellers, contactless interface at airport, strict enforcement of CAB, etc. In this background the following recommendations are made:
Agenda 2: Any other subjects - Nil
The Chairman-TAC thanked all the participants for their active participation.
Dr. Md. Shariff Dr. M.K. Sudarshan Member Secretary, Chairman, TAC, COVID-19 TAC COVID-19 24th July, 2021 24th July, 2021
Advisory Committee dated 30.07.2021 is extracted hereunder:
“COVID - 19 : TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, KARNATAKA
Proceedings of the 117th meeting of State COVID-19 - Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), Dept. of Health &
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:58:
Family Welfare held on Friday, 30th July 2021 at 07:00 PM by ECHO Zoom Video conference.
Members
Special invitees :
Dr. M. K. Sudarshan, Chairman TAC welcomed all the participants.
Agenda 1: Unlock 5.0 — TAC Guidelines
The TAC discussed in detail the current scenario of COVlD19 in the state, TPR of the districts, etc. (Annexure-1) , COVID-19 situation in the country and neighbouring states of Kerala and Maharashtra, (Annexure-2) , compliance to CAB in public places by the general population and finalized the guidelines of unlock 5.0 (Annexure-3) . For Bengaluru Urban (1.4Cr) though the TPR is < 2% ( 0.73%) still it is
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:59:
recommended to impose stricter restrictions as a measure of abundant public health precaution as there is regular travel of people between the city to/from Kerala & Maharashtra. Hence, even Bengaluru urban district shall follow the guidelines of unlock 5.0.
There shall be a continuous surveillance of districts for TPR, oxygen bed occupancy, R0 factor and the results shall be used judiciously to unlock the districts appropriately.
TAC recommends accelerating COVID-19 vaccination coverage in the districts where there is surge in cases.
The Chairman-TAC thanked all the participants for their active participation.
Dr. Md. Shariff Dr. M.K. Sudarshan Member Secretary, Chairman, TAC, COVID-19 TAC COVID-19 30th July, 2021 30th July, 2021
Annexure-1
District wise distribution of Test Positivity Rate (TPR) and Variants of Concern (VoC) (30th July)
| District | Test Positivity Rate (in last 7 days) |
Alph a |
Delta/ B.1.6 17.2 |
Delta Plus / B.1.617.2. 1 (AY.1) |
Kapp a |
Beta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dakshina Kannada |
4.42 | 19 | 48 | 2 | ||
| Chikkamangalur u |
3.67 | 4 | ||||
| Kodagu | 3.44 | 9 | ||||
| Udupi | 3.39 | 27 | 9 | 4 | 1 | |
| Hassan | 2.08 | 36 | ||||
| Shivamoga | 2.03 | 4 | 1 | |||
| Chamarajanagar | 1.92 | 12 | ||||
| Mysuru | 1.6 | 18 | 1 | |||
| Uttara Kannada | 1.44 | 4 | 1 | |||
| Tumkuru | 1.27 | |||||
| State | 1.18 | 155 | 1089 | 3 | 159 | 7 |
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:60:
| Bengaluru (Rural) |
1.16 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Belagavi | 1.11 | 8 | ||||
| Kolara | 0.96 | 27 | 1 | |||
| Mandya | 0.82 | 8 | ||||
| Devanagere | 0.77 | 1 | 4 | |||
| Bangaluru (Urban) |
0.73 | 99 | 791 | 2 | 143 | |
| Chitradurga | 0.73 | |||||
| Kalburgi | 0.49 | |||||
| Chikkaballapura | 0.44 | |||||
| Koppal | 0.34 | |||||
| Ballari | 0.33 | 2 | ||||
| Gadag | 0.28 | |||||
| Haveri | 0.27 | 7 | ||||
| Dharwad | 0.26 | |||||
| Ramanagara | 0.22 | 7 | ||||
| Vijayapura | 0.22 | 1 | 94 | 7 | ||
| Bagalkot | 0.17 | |||||
| Bidar | 0.13 | |||||
| Yadgir | 0.12 | |||||
| Raichur | 0.1 |
Note: R0 factor of the state is 0.88 as of 28th July, 2021.
Annexure-2 - COVID-19 scenario in the country
xx xxxx xxxxxx
Annexure-3
Proposed framework to unlock/roll back of existing restrictions in Karnataka
From Monday, 2nd August, to 16th August, 2021 (Unlock 5.0)*
Plan of unlock / roll back back Remarks of existing restrictions in districts TPR >2% All officers (50%, roll Delta variant (1089) - back): Encourage work Bengaluru Urban (791); from home. Vijayapura (94); DK (48); Hassan Factories & Industries (36); Kolar (27); Haveri (14); (50%, roll back)
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021 :61:
| |
Open markets (CAB) Neighbourhood shops (CAB) |
others (79) Delta plus (3)- Belgaluru (2); Mysuru (1) |
|---|---|---|
| |
Restaurant - 50% (roll back) Public transport 50% (roll back) Parks and gardens (CAB) |
**Caution: 1.**There is increase in cases in the neighbouring Kerala, Maharashtra, AP, TN. Recently, there is no decline in the .. cases in state; and in some districts - |
| | Resorts/Picnic/tourists spots(to close) |
DK, Coorg & Udupi there is increase. Hence,roll back of |
| | Closed Markets (CAB) | current restrictions is strongly |
| | Malls & shopping complexes (50% & CAB, roll back) |
recommended to speed up reduction of cases in the state. Newly emerging Delta variants |
| | Shopping lanes (CAB) | are of serious public health |
| | Barber shops/saloons & spas (50%, roll back) |
concern in low vaccination coverage areas, spread rapidly and affect lungs.**3.**There is very |
| | Marriage halls - 40 persons maximum, (rolled back from 100) strictly with individual passes |
poor compliance to CAB.4. The unlock guidelines of Delhi was reviewed previously and continues |
| | Pubs & Bars (to close - rollback) |
to show drastic decline in daily cases- 51 (29thJuly, 2021). |
| | Gyms and Yoga centres (to close- roll back) |
* Weekend curfew (Friday 7 pm to Monday 6 am with strong vigil, roll back) |
| | Places of worship (to close for public - roll back Funerals/Burials (10, roll back) |
* Very strict enforcement of Covid-19 appropriate beha... (CAB) like compulsory wearing of face mask, etc., |
| | Cinema halls (to close-roll back) |
* Interstate arrivals (MAH / KER) |
| |
Sports (indoor/outdoor) (for training purpose only) Clubs & Club houses (to |
shall be restricted to dose vaccinated or persons with negative RT-PCR report older than |
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:62:
| close - roll back) | 3 days and it is valid for 14 days. | |
|---|---|---|
| | Swimming pools (for training purpose only) (CAB) |
* International arrivals as per GoK advisory |
| | Public washrooms & toilets (to close-roll back) |
* Opening of schools shall be decided separately. |
| | Rallies, fairs & festivals, public ceremonies, and functions, etc., shall not be permitted |
* The result of this unlock shall be closely monitored and daily reviewed on 13thAugust 2021. |
Note: (1) The districts that have TPR <2% shall continue with existing unlock guidelines. However, strict enforcement to prevent congregation of people in public areas like markets, fairs & festivals, places of worship, rallies etc., is recommended. (2) For Bengaluru Urban (1.4 Cr) though the TPR is <2% (0.73%) still it is recommended to impose stricter restrictions as a measure of abundant public health precaution as there is regular travel of people between the city to/from Kerala & Maharashtra. Hence, even Bengaluru urban district shall follow the abovementioned guidelines of unlock 5.0.”
issued by the Deputy commissioner & District Magistrate,
Dakshina Kannada district, Mangalore dated 31.07.2021 is extracted hereunder:
“No. …....156/2021/133462425 Dated: 31-07-2021
Restrictions and precautions prescribed by the District Administration in connection with the prevention of the spread of Covid-19 in Dakshina Kannada District, in the event of a short rise in the number of Covid cases even after the necessary steps have been taken in a timely manner. In view of the escalating situation, as per the
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:63:
Government order, promulgates special norms to be followed by the travelers entering Karnataka from Kerala and Maharashtra with regard to more precautionary control and vigilance.
Meanwhile, noticed a huge spike of Covid cases in Kasaragod district of Kerala, which shares a border with Dakshina Kannada district. As people travelling from neighbouring State/district to Dakshina Kannada district are more likely to spread the disease from person-to-person, it is imperative to prevent unrestricted travel and interference by the public as part of ensuring the safety of the people in Dakshina Kannada district. The Government is also advised to closely monitor border areas to prevent any major crises.
Due to the increasing prevalence of the disease in Dakshina Kannada district, at present, it is imperative that strict precautions be taken to prevent the spread of the third phase.
Therefore, in the light of the current developments in our district and the spread of Covid 19 disease in the border State of Kasaragod district in Kerala, I, Dr. Rajendra K.V., IAS, District Collector and District Magistrate and Chairman, District Level Disaster Management Committee, orders the imposition of the following restrictions under Section 34 of the Disaster Management Act and the power to apply Section 144(3) of the Penal Code, 1973.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:64:
PCR negative certificate and after 7 days undergo for retest to ensure no Covid positive.
The relevant authorities are tasked with enforcing the above Covid rules strictly. If the laws are violated by any person/persons, they will be prosecuted under Sections 50 to 60 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, Section 188 of the IPC and Sections 4, 5 and 10 of the Karnataka Infectious Diseases Act, 2020.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:65:
Signed District Collector and District Magistrate District Disaster Management Authority Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore”
Government of Karnataka imposing special surveillance measures, which is the focal point of the writ petitions, is extracted hereunder:
“GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
No. HFW 220 ACS 2021
Karnataka Government Secretariat Vikasa Soudha, Bengaluru, dated: 31.7.2021
REVISED CIRCULAR
Subject: Special surveillance measures for arrivals from Kerala & Maharashtra – Regarding Reference: (1) Proceedings of 112th meeting of State COVID 19 TAC dated 30.6.2021.
(2) Order No: RD 158 TNR 2020, Dated: 28.6.2021 & 01.07.2021.
(3) Proceedings of 116th meeting of State COVID 19 TAC Dated: 24.7.2021.
In view of the current COVID-19 situation, the following revised special surveillance measures are notified herewith to be complied strictly for arrivals from Kerala & Maharashtra.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:66:
Permitted exemptions for negative RT-PCR certificate are as follows:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:67:
PCR test report, further action will be taken as per the State Protocol.
Additional Chief Secretary to Govt., Department of Health and Family Welfare”
to the Government, State of Karnataka, is extracted hereunder:
“GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
No. RD 158 TNR 2020 Karnataka Government Secretariat,
MS Building Bengaluru, Dated: 06-08-2021
ORDER
Containment measures to prevent spread of COVID 19
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:68:
Whereas, the Hon'ble Chief Minister on 06-08-2021 reviewed the COVID 19 situation in the State with the concerned Officers and Health Experts. It was suggested by the Health Experts that additional containment measures need to be imposed in light of up-coming festival season to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred under the sub-section (1) of Section 24 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, the Chairman, State Executive Committee, directs Chief Commissioner BBMP, Police Commissioners, Deputy Commissioners. Superintendents of Police of the districts. and other Authorities to take following additional containment measures in view of the upcoming festival season which will come into effect from 07-O8-2021 and will be in force until 16-08-2021.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:69:
with a maximum of 20 people. Functioning of academic institutions permitted as per orders Read at Serial No.2 and 3.
The Chief Commissioner BBMP, Police Commissioners, Deputy Commissioners, and Superintendents of Police in their jurisdiction shall enforce the above guidelines strictly and take action against any person violating these measures under the relevant provisions of Section 51 to 60 of Disaster Management Act, 2005, besides legal action under Section I88 of the IPC, and other legal provisions as applicable.
Sd/Principal Secretary to Govt., Revenue Department (DM) and Member Secretary, State Executive Committee”
Technical Advisory Committee, Department of Health & Family Welfare dated 15.08.2021 is extracted hereunder:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:70:
Proceedings of the 120th meeting of State COVID-19— Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), Dept. of Health & Family Welfare held on Sunday, 15th August 2021 at 6:00 PM by ECHO Zoom Video conference.
Members :
Special invitees :
Dr. M.K. Sudarshan, Chairman TAC welcomed all the participants.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:71:
Agenda 1: Justification for compulsory RT-PCR testing of persons coming from Kerala irrespective of their vaccination status [Ref. ACS-HFW]
The currently available Covid -19 vaccines are known to protect the vaccinated individual against the disease — particularly of the severe form, and prevent death. But the Covid-19 vaccines are not known to protect the vaccinated individual from Covid-19 infection. Hence, the vaccinated individual may still contract Covid -19 viral infection that is referred to as "break through infection”. Such infected individuals (harboring the Covid-19 virus) who are otherwise vaccinated are capable of infecting others and thus, drive the pandemic. Many times such vaccinated individuals out of false sense of security for being vaccinated, do not wear face mask that further aids transmission of infection. In Karnataka, about 13,768 cases of such breakthrough infections are reported.
Since, July 2021 the Covid -19 situation in Karnataka (6.8 crore population) is quite stable and in the last few weeks the average daily report of new cases is about - 1,600 to 1,800. In comparison for the same period in Kerala (3.4 crore population) about 18,000-22,000 new cases are reported every day. This high incidence of Covid-19 infection in Kerala is despite good vaccination coverage in the State. The test positivity rate (TPR) has been quite high of over 10% for a very long period in the State of Kerala.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:72:
A careful examination of the locality revealed that there was a regular, frequent travel and daily movement of over 25,000 persons from the adjacent districts of Kerala to these districts on a continual basis. In this context, the Karnataka Covid-19 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) of State Health Department noted that the incident of Covid19 cases was high in these border districts of Dakshina Kannada, Udupi, Chamarajanagara, Kodagu and Mysore (Table-1, vide below) and as compared to other districts of Karnataka (Annexure-1)
Table1: Covid-19 scenario in the districts of Karnataka adjoining Kerala for the period 1st June to 15th August, 2021
| Border districts | New cases | Positivity rate | Deaths |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dakshina Kannada |
29,494 | 5.36 | 554 |
| Udupi | 12413 | 4.8 | 103 |
| Chamarajanagara | 5388 | 4.82 | 92 |
| Kodagu | 8859 | 5.83 | 67 |
| Mysuru | 30,713 | 5.22 | 672 |
As a result of this Covid 19 scenario, the state is compelled to decide not to reopen schools & PU colleges in these districts (test positivity rate - TPR being more than 2%) despite planning to do it in the rest of the state from 23rd August, 2021.
Also, in the beginning of the second wave the initial cases reported were from the students who arrived from Kerala that later triggered clusters of cases in the hostels
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:73:
and institutions they studied in and around Mangalore. This eventually spread to the rest of Karnataka, leading to a second wave and a massive 19.5 lakh cases were reported. Since June, 2021 a comparison of daily incidence of cases in Karnataka and Kerala reveals that there is a significant decline in Karnataka as compared to continued higher incidence in Kerala (Annexure-2). It was opined that there was a regular, continuous spillover of infection from Kerala (high infection/disease burden) to the border district of Karnataka (low infection/ disease burden) due to daily traffic of people from Kerala to Karnataka.
Consequently, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) recommended compulsory negative RT-PCR test report irrespective of their vaccination status of those arriving from Kerala to prevent entry of infection into the state. The validity of this certificate is for a duration of 7 days. This strategy has largely provided good results as it has prevented further surges in the specified border districts of Karnataka adjacent to Kerala. As health is a state subject, the state has considered this prudent action to protect the lives of its citizens from the Covid -19 infection and prevent its introduction into the state by those arriving from Kerala. Thus, by this action the entry of the virus is prevented and not of the person (having negative RT-PCR report) from Kerala. Lastly, this insistence on compulsory RT-PCR certificate will be reviewed when
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:74:
there is a significant decline of Covid-19 infection in the State of Kerala.
Agenda 2 : Testing strategy in children [Ref. ACS-HFW]
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dr. Md. Shariff Dr. M.K. Sudarshan Member Secretary, Chairman, TAC, COVID-19 TAC COVID-19 15th August, 2021 15th August, 2021
Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India is extracted hereunder:
D.O. No. Z.28015/138/2021-DM Cell 27th August, 2021
The State of Kerala has witnessed a sustained and significant transmission of COVID-19 since July, 2021. The State reported an average of 13,500 cases per day in the month of July and almost 19,500 daily new cases in August so far. Kerala remains the one of the top contributors to daily new cases and is contributing more than half the active cases of COVID19 in the country at present. Despite efforts by the State Government on increasing testing, the test conformation percentage still remains very high (more than 15%), signaling high and widespread transmission.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:75:
All 14 districts in Kerala have been identified as districts of concern due to high test positivity rates and high cases per million reported in the past 4 weeks. Further, Thrissur, Kozhikode and Ernakulam have reported more than 4,000 cases per million population in the week ending 25th August, 2021.
While the State has undertaken several measures to contain the transmission of COVID-19, the desired results are yet to materialize. Considering the recent sharp increase in the number of cases, deaths and the test positivity rate after the Onam festivities and the likelihood of this trend continuing for a few more days, this Ministry reiterates the following to assist the State:
A. Containment measures:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:76:
and ensure that there is intensive follow up of all such cases under home isolation.
C. Genomic surveillance:
D. Vaccination
E. Other measures
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:77:
MoHFW's advisory on graded restrictions/ relaxation measures for COVID-19 dated 28th June, 2021.
I would like to reiterate that any laxity in ensuring strict adherence to the five-fold strategy of 'Test-TrackTreat-Vaccinate and Ensuring COVID Appropriate Behaviour', may result in further surge in COVID-19 transmission in Kerala and its neighbouring States.
I am hopeful that with your proactive support and leadership we will be able to halt the surge of cases and prevent any further resurgences.
Yours sincerely, Sd/(Rajesh Bhushan)
Dr. V. P. Joy, Chief Secretary, Govt. of Kerala Thiruvananthapuram”
passed by a learned single Judge of the Karnataka High Court at Bengaluru reads thus:
“ O R D E R
First petitioner is working as a Nurse and second petitioner is a student and both are residents of Mangaluru in Dakshina Kannada district.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:78:
(Annexure-A) with regard to protocols to be followed by the citizens who arrive from Kerala and Maharashtra. Mangaluru is a border district in Karnataka and shares its border with Kerala. The State Government, on the basis of the Technical Advisory Committee report, has issued a revised Circular containing six conditions. The Committee in its 120th meeting held on 15.8.2021 has reiterated its earlier stand. However, respondents are not strictly enforcing the Circular. He pointed out that the positivity rate is highest in Dakshina Kannada and Kodagu districts. If the conditions contained in Annexure-A are not strictly implemented, the petitioners and other citizens shall be exposed to the risk of infection. Accordingly, he sought for an appropriate direction against respondents to ensure that the Circular as per Annexure-A is strictly implemented.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:79:
all measures to enforce the Circular strictly and the petitioners' apprehension that the Circular is not enforced strictly is factually unfounded.
Writ petition is disposed off.”
Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, for domestic travel, in supersession of the guidelines issued on 24.05.2020 are extracted hereunder:
“Government of India
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare
Guidelines for domestic travel (flight/train/ship/bus inter-state travel) in supersession of guidelines issued on 24.05.2020
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:80:
1. Background
The Union Government has not recommended any restrictions on inter-state travel in the context of COVID-19. Further, States are allowed to develop their own protocols with regards to quarantine and isolation as per their assessment. It has come to notice that certain States, however, have imposed negative RTPCR testing reports as a criterion for point of entry in their states.
Presently, we are seeing a declining trajectory of cases across the country after a peak in reported cases during mid-May as part of the second wave. With a view to facilitate inter-State travel, while observing required precautions, the guidelines for domestic travel (flight/train/ship/bus inter-state travel) are revised so as to have a uniform protocol for domestic travel across the country.
2. Scope
These guidelines are applicable to all States/UTs so as to facilitate inter-state travel. Based on the evolving scenario of COVID-19, including evidence of mutant variants within India or outside, the guidelines may warrant suitable revision to institute appropriate public health measures also.
3. General Advisory to all passengers
People must follow required health protocols, as detailed below, whenever there is a need to travel:
i. Passengers should self-monitor their health and travel only when they have no symptoms related to COVID-19.
ii. All passengers shall follow COVID appropriate behavior at all times which includes use of mask/face cover, hand hygiene and physical distancing of six feet (do gaj ki doori) as far as feasible. Masks/face covers must be worn properly to cover nose and mouth.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:81:
Touching the front portion of mask/face covers to be avoided.
iii. Avoid spitting in public places during travel.
iv. All passengers shall be advised to download Arogya Setu app on their mobile devices.
v. If they develop fever during travel, they shall report to cabin crew/TTE/bus conductor as the case may be.
vi. If they develop symptoms after reaching their final destination, they shall inform the District Surveillance Officer or the State/National Call Center (1075).
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
6. Advisory to States/UTs
i. There shall be no restrictions on inter-State travel by air, rail, water, or road.
ii. In case RT-PCR or RAT tests are required prior to entry in a State, as notified by the State govt., the same must be publicized widely to maximize traveller convenience.
iii. Asymptomatic persons who have been vaccinated with both doses of the COVID 19 vaccine and 15 days have lapsed since the administration of second dose of the vaccine and are in possession of the final vaccination certificate issued through the COWIN portal, such persons may be exempted from mandatory requirement of possessing a negative RTPCR report or RAT test on their entry into the State.
iv. Passengers who are found symptomatic on arrival shall be subjected to Rapid Antigen Test at the Terminal to aid early identification.
v. In the event of unusual surge in cases in any State/UT, the States/UTs may institute appropriate public health measures promptly.
vi. States may implement additional restrictions, based on local requirements.”
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:82:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:83:
possessing a negative RTPCR certificate taken within 72 hours. Significantly, such restrictions are imposed as per the circulars dated 31.07.2021, issued by the State of Karnataka.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:84:
restricted the entry from the State of Maharashtra, by imposing similar requirements.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:85:
functionaries and health-care professionals; children below two years; and in dire emergency situations (death in the family, medical treatment, etc.), the passengers swab shall be collected on arrival in Karnataka with necessary details and appropriate steps would be taken as per the State Protocol.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:86:
revised so as to have a uniform protocol for domestic travel across the country. From the scope of the said guideline, it is clear that the guidelines are applicable to all States/UTs, so as to facilitate inter-State travel, based on the downward trajectory noticed thereunder, and of course, general advisory is given to all passengers.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:87:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:88:
based on local requirements. In fact, on a reading of the expert opinions and health advisories provided to the Government of Karnataka restrictions are imposed on the basis of the sustained and significant transmission of COVID-19 disease, since July, 2021, within the State of Kerala.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:89:
of “Test-Track-Treat-Vaccinate and ensuring COVID appropriate behaviour (CAB)”, it is cautioned, it may result in further surge in COVID-19 transmission in Kerala and its neighbouring States.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:90:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:91:
freedom and liberty granted as per the guidelines dated 25.08.2021, State of Karnataka has the necessary leverage to issue circulars, taking into account the situations prevailing in the neighbouring States of Kerala and Maharashtra.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:92:
the National/State Highways and other roads. Such a situation is not prevailing now, justifying us to issue any such direction, since the circulars themselves make it clear that only restrictions are made within the State of Karnataka so as to manage the travelling public entering the State, which can only be viewed as a methodology adopted by the State to curb the spread of COVID-19 disease.
“15. This Court had occasion in Dr. Khare's case [(1950) S.C.R. 519] to define the scope of the judicial review under clause (5) of article 19 where the phrase "imposing reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right" also occurs and four out of the five Judges participating in the decision expressed the view (the other Judge leaving the question open) that both the substantive and the procedural aspects of the impugned restrictive law should be examined from the point of view of reasonableness; that is to say, the Court should consider not only factors such as the duration and the extent of the restrictions, but also the circumstances under which and the manner in which their imposition has been authorised. It is important in this context to bear in mind that the test of reasonableness, where ever prescribed, should be applied to each individual statute impugned, and no
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:93:
abstract standard, or general pattern of reasonableness can be maid down as applicable to all cases. The nature of the right alleged to have been infringed, the underlying purpose of the restrictions imposed, the extent and urgency of the evil sought to be remedied thereby, the disproportion of the imposition, the prevailing conditions at the time, should all enter into the judicial verdict. In evaluating such elusive factors and forming their own conception of what is reasonable, in all the circumstances of a given case, it is inevitable that the social philosophy and the scale of values of the judges participating in the decision should play an important part, and the limit to their interference with legislative judgment in such cases can only be dictated by their sense of responsibility and self-restraint and the sobering reflection that the Constitution is meant not only for people of their way of thinking but for all, and that the majority of the elected representatives of the people have, in authorising the imposition of the restrictions, considered them to be reasonable.”
attention to the decision in Oil and Natural Gas Commission
vs. Utpal Kumar Basu and Ors . [(1994) 4 SCC 711], which dealt with territorial jurisdiction, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court, at paragraphs 5 & 6 held as under:
“5. Clause (1) of Article 226 begins with a non-obstante clause - notwithstanding anything in Article 32 - and provides that every High Court shall have power “throughout the territorial in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction”, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, “within those territories” directions, orders or writs, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III or for any other purpose. Under
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:94:
clause (2) of Article 226 the High Court may exercise its power conferred by clause (1) if the cause of action, wholly or in part, had arisen within the territory over which it exercises jurisdiction, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the residence of such person is not within those territories. On a plain reading of the aforesaid two clauses of Article 226 of the Constitution it becomes clear that a High Court can exercise the power to issue directions, orders or writs for the enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution or for any other purpose if the cause of action, wholly or in part, had arisen within the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, notwithstanding that the seat of the Government or authority or the residence of the person against whom the direction, order or writ is issued is not within the said territories. In order to confer jurisdiction on the High Court of Calcutta, NICCO must show that at least a part of the cause of action had arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of that Court. That is at best its case in the writ petition.
“...the cause of action has no relation whatever to the defence which may be set up by the Defendant, nor does it depend upon the character of the relief prayed for by the Plaintiff. It refers entirely to the grounds set forth in the plaint as the cause of action or in other words to the media upon which the plaintiff asks the Court to arrive at a conclusion in his favour.”
Therefore, in determining the 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. In
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:95:
other words the question whether a High Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain a Writ Petition must be answered on the basis of the averments made in the petition, the truth or otherwise whereof being immaterial. To put it differently, the question of territorial jurisdiction must be decided on the facts pleaded in the petition. Therefore, the question whether in the instant case the Calcutta High Court had jurisdiction to entertain and decide the Writ Petition in question even on the facts alleged must depend upon whether the averments made in paragraphs 5, 7, 18, 22, 26 and 43 are sufficient in law to establish that a part of the cause of action had arisen within the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court.”
:96:
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
Court in Nawal Kishore Sharma v. Union of India and
Others [(2014) 9 SCC 329] and submitted that since the personal liberty of the citizens in Kerala are affected, part cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court.
Others [(2010) 1 SCC 457], in regard to the restrictions imposed as to the personal liberty and individual rights, vis-avis , public interest and also to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gurusimran Singh Narula v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. [(2021) 1 SCC 152], rendered under the provisions of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. In Gurusimran Singh Narula (cited supra ), the Hon'ble Apex Court has considered the issue of spraying of all kinds of disinfectant on human beings, without the approval of relevant Ministry, and the inaction of the State, to prevent or regulate the same.
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:97:
action as regards the circulars issued by the State of Karnataka/ its officials would not arise in the State of Kerala. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the petitioners have failed to establish territorial jurisdiction of this Court in interfering with the circulars issued by the State of Karnataka dated 31.07.2021 and accordingly, we decline the reliefs sought for by the petitioners in the background of the circulars so issued.
In the result, the writ petitions are dismissed for want of territorial jurisdiction. No costs
Sd/S. MANIKUMAR CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE
krj
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021 :98:
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO.16833/2021
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :
Exhibit P1 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.07.2021 PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P1 (A) COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P1.
Exhibit P2 COPY OF THE PRINT OUT OF THE NEWS PUBLISHED IN THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS DATED 2.7.2021.
Exhibit P4 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 11.6.2021 IN WP(C) NO.9399 OF 2020 ALONG WITH WP(C) NO.9413 OF 2020.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:99:
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO.17071/2021
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :
| EXHIBIT P1 | COPY OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF |
|---|---|
| KARNATAKA BEARING NO.RD 158 TNR 2020 DATED 01.07.2021. |
| EXHIBIT P2 | COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01.04.2020 IN WPC (TMP) NO.2 OF 2020. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P3 | COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.40-3/2020-DM-I(A) ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS DATED 29.08.2020. |
| EXHIBIT P3 A | COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.40-3/2020-DM-I(A) DATED 29.04.2021. |
| EXHIBIT P3 B | COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.40-3/2020-DM-I(A) DATED 29.06.2021. |
| EXHIBIT P3 C | COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.40-3/2020-DM-I(A) DATED 28.07.2021. |
| EXHIBIT P4 | COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01.04.2021 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN WP NO.3949 OF 2021. |
| EXHIBIT P5 | TRUE COPY OF THE ADVISORY DATED 04.05.2021 ISSUED BY THE ICMR. |
| EXHIBIT P6 | COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BEARING NO.RD 158TNR2020 DATED 06.08.2021. |
W.P(C)s.16833 & 17071/2021
:100:
EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 03.08.2021 SENT TO THE HON'BLE CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA BY THE PETITIONER WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT P7 A ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P7.
EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 06.08.2021 ISSUED TO THE HON'BLE CHIEF MINISTER OF KARNATAKA BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF THE GO(RT) NO.530/2021/DMD DATED 17.07.2021.
EXHIBIT P10 COPY OF THE ORDER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & DISTRICT MAGISTRATE'S OFFICE, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31.07.2021.
EXHIBIT P10(A) ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT-P10(A).
EXHIBIT P11 COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE DISASTER MANAGEMENT ACT, 2005.
EXHIBIT P12 COPY OF THE REVISED CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31.07.2021.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:-NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO C.J.
1 issue framed by the court
Did Karnataka's RT-PCR requirements for travellers from Kerala give rise to any part of the cause of action within Kerala, conferring territorial jurisdiction on this Court?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P.(C) No.9399 of 2020Referred¶85
W.P.(C) No.9413 of 2020Referred¶85
W.P.(C) No.3949 of 2021Referred¶105
People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India & OthersReferred¶120
[W.P.(C) No.196/2001]
Vincent Panikulangara v. Union of India & Ors.Referred¶120
[(1987) 2 SCC 165] · Who else cites this
CESC Ltd. v. Subhash Chandra BoseReferred¶120
[(1992) 1 SCC 441] · Who else cites this
Consumer Education and Research Centre v. Union of IndiaReferred¶120
[(2010) 15 SCC 699] · Who else cites this
Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.Referred¶121
[(1996) 4 SCC 37] · Who else cites this
W.P.(C) (TMP) No.2 of 2020Distinguished¶770
W.P. No.14952 of 2021Relied on¶679
State of Madras and Ors. v. V.G. RowReferred¶774
(AIR 1952 SC 196) · Who else cites this
Oil and Natural Gas Commission vs. Utpal Kumar Basu and Ors.Relied on¶781
[(1994) 4 SCC 711] · Who else cites this
Om Prakash Srivastava v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.Referred¶792
[(2006) 6 SCC 207] · Who else cites this
Nawal Kishore Sharma v. Union of India and OthersReferred¶797
[(2014) 9 SCC 329] · Who else cites this
Rajendran Chingaravelu v. R.K.Mishra, Additional Commissioner of Income Tax and OthersReferred¶799
[(2010) 1 SCC 457] · Who else cites this
Gurusimran Singh Narula v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.Referred¶799
[(2021) 1 SCC 152] · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
JAYANANDA K.R.
A.K.M ASHRAF
UNION OF INDIA
STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT
STATE OF KERALA
S.MANIKUMAR
SHAJI P.CHALY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
