Plea In Supreme Court Challenges COVID Vaccine Mandates Of Delhi, MP, TN & Maharashtra

A plea has been moved before the Supreme Court of India seeking directions to strike down as unconstitutional the vaccine mandates issued by the various States, specifically by the Governments of Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu.

The application has been filed by Dr Jacob Puliyel, a former member of the National Technical Advisory Group of Immunization, seeking ad-interim directions in the writ petition earlier filed by him for directions to publicize the data relating to clinical trials and efficacy of the vaccines administered to Indians for COVID-19 pandemic.  

The application filed through Advocate Prashant Bhushan has stated that while the Union Government has clearly stated in numerous RTIs and in its counter affidavit filed in the present case that Covid vaccines are voluntary and cannot be mandated at this stage, there are many instances from across the country where now various States are mandating the vaccines for opening shops, retaining employment, entering educational institutions and even stepping out on public streets and spaces.

'No Person Can Be Forcibly Vaccinated Without Consent; Hasn't Made Carrying Vaccine Certificate Mandatory For Any Purpose' : Centre Tells Supreme Court

Therefore the applicant has also sought to implead the NCT of Delhi, State of Madhya Pradesh, State of Maharashtra and State of Tamil Nadu in the present case as they have issued such mandates in their respective states.

The applicant has referred to the following mandates issued by these States:

• NCT of Delhi through order dated 8.10.2021 by the Disaster Management Authority, Government of NCT of Delhi: It has been stated that the Government of NCT of Delhi issued an order mandating Covid vaccines for all employees, failing which they will not be allowed to attend their offices and places of work and will be marked as "on leave". 

The application has stated that many professors/teachers at colleges at Delhi University and schools have written to the advocate for the petitioner, aggrieved by this order that would deny them their right to livelihood especially in light of the various vaccine adverse events that have been reported worldwide and the lack of clinical trial data for the vaccines being administered under emergency authorisation in India.

• State of Madhya Pradesh through order dated 8.11.2021 issued by The Food and Civil Supplies Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh: The order mandated that subsidised or free food grains at all fair price shops will be given only to those who have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19.
• State of Maharashtra through order dated 27.11.2021 issued by Department of Revenue and Forest, Disaster Management, Relief and Rehabilitation, Government of Maharashtra: The order mandates COVID-19 vaccination for actors, shop-owners, to travel in public transport etc.:
  
• State of Tamil Nadu through circular dated 18.11.2021 issued by the Directorate of Public Health, Tamil Nadu: The circular has made vaccination against COVID-19 mandatory for people to even step out into public places in Tamil Nadu.

The present PIL has been filed seeking public disclosure of clinical trial data and post vaccination efficacy data of COVID vaccines, as is required by International medical norms, and to stop the coercive mandate issued by various governments for vaccination.

Why LiveLaw Premium Subscription Is A Must For Your Legal Research And Practice

The Supreme Court had in August last year issued notice to the Union of India, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), Drug Controller of India and vaccine manufacturers Bharat Biotech Ltd and Serum Institute of India. 

The petitioner had in September 2021 filed an affidavit before the Court arguing that administering vaccines through coercion cannot be a matter of public health since the vaccines are not an effective guarantee against infection and transmission. The petitioner had argued that as vaccination does not prevent transmission of the disease, therefore discriminating against unvaccinated persons by denying them access to services or the means to earn their livelihood is arbitrary, discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Responding to the PIL, the Central Government had submitted before the Supreme Court that it has not mandated for Covid 19 vaccines to be administered mandatorily at this stage. While hearing the case in November, a bench led by Justice Nageswara Rao had observed that the Court will examine if the vaccine mandates of the States are disproportionate.

The Centre had stated that according to Covid-19 Vaccine Operational Guidelines", a detailed policy document providing broad vision of government regarding Covid-19 vaccination programme formulated by it, covid vaccination is voluntary.

Last week, the Centre stated in an affidavit filed in another case that vaccination cannot be compulsory and that it has not made carrying of COVID vaccination certificate mandatory for any purpose.

Case Title: Jacob Puliyel vs Union of India