States defend Covid vaccine mandate before SC

Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, and Madhya Pradesh on Tuesday told the Supreme Court that vaccine mandates issued to avail public transport and access public places were necessary in public interest. The mandate was a reasonable restriction and satisfied the tests of proportionality, they claimed.

Advocate Rahul Chitnis, representing the Maharashtra government, submitted before a bench headed by Justices L Nageswara Rao and B R Gavai that the vaccine mandate is in public interest and pointed out that a large number of people use public transport in Mumbai.

“People are packed like sardines on the trains…. In a train, it is difficult to maintain six feet social distance and keep your mask up,” Chitnis said, emphasising on the utility of vaccine mandates while using public transport.

The court was hearing a PIL by Jacob Puliyel against vaccine mandates.

Chitnis countered the suggestion that the mandate is manifestly arbitrary and violates the Article 14 of the Constitution.

It is a measure to protect the right to life of the people under Article 21 of the Constitution, he said, adding, "Rights have to be balanced. State would be justified in protecting a larger number of people".

The counsel for Madhya Pradesh adopted the submissions of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta regarding the need to balance the rights in the context of Covid vaccination. The counsel informed the bench that a notice making vaccination mandatory to avail ration has been withdrawn.

Additional Advocate General Amit Anand Tiwari, representing Tamil Nadu, submitted that the state has made vaccination mandatory for accessing public spaces, which is required for larger public interest.

“It is to provide security from a higher outbreak," he claimed.

The top court was informed that the state government derived the power to impose the vaccine mandate from the Tamil Nadu Public Health Act, 1939 and the Disaster Management Act, 2005.

Tiwari also referred to reports stating that when more people are vaccinated, the number of infections reduces and the likelihood of hospitalisation gets decreased.

It was submitted that vaccine mandates were justified for it prevented mutation of the virus, while the unvaccinated people, on other hand, caused health risk.

Check out the latest videos from DH: