Curfew relaxations: Was MHA rulebook followed, HC asks UT
‘DICHOTOMY’ Noticing conflict between central guidelines and UT order, high court gives admn a day’s time to clarify
CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court on Thursday gave the Chandigarh administration a day to apprise it of whether relaxations given by it were in line with the Union ministry of home affairs’ (MHA) guidelines.
“..Prima-facie certain conflict/dichotomy between the orders passed by the Chandigarh administration and ministry of home affairs guidelines are observed…,” the bench of chief justice RS Jha and justice Arun Palli observed, giving UT’s senior standing counsel Pankaj Jain one day to examine issues raised in the petition with regards to violation of MHA guidelines and inform the high court on Friday.
The court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by advocate Pankaj Chandgothia, who has sought quashing of UT’s May 3 order relaxing the curfew up to May 17.
UT had imposed the curfew on March 23 and ended it on May 3 at a time when the city was seeing a spike in the number of Covid-19 cases and was retained in the Centre’s red zone list.
The total number of cases have since reached close to 200, with more than 50% being reported post May 3. City’s first case was reported on March 18.
Jain reasoned that now with the passage of time more relaxations were being granted. However, the court was not convinced with his argument.
The court also sought to know about the guidelines from additional solicitor general, Satya Pal Jain, who elaborated these, and informed the court that it
› The MHA guidelines expressly prohibit opening of all market complexes, but UT adopted its own definition and allowed market complexes...in each sector to resume business.
PANKAJ CHANDGOTHIA, advocate and petitioner
may examine whether there is a violation, but MHA guidelines issued under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, cannot be diluted in any manner and are to be enforced strictly.
THE PETITION
The court was told that the MHA guidelines expressly prohibited opening of all market complexes, but UT adopted its own definition and allowed market complexes on the central roads of each sector to resume business.
MHA has only allowed standalone shops and neighbourhood shops in colonies, and all malls and market complexes had to remain closed, the court was told.
The ministry’s guidelines also prohibit inter-state movement, except for emergency purposes, but UT has allowed entry of all.
It also misconstrued the definition of containment zone. As per MHA guidelines, containment zone will be a residential colony, municipal ward or police station, town, etc.
However, UT has six containment zones with ambiguous boundaries, Chandgothia informed the court, adding that till May 3, the entire city was a containment zone.
He also questioned why all categories of shops were allowed to be opened even as the city fell in the red zone and why shops were open during a wide window of 10am to 6pm.