Supreme Court: Kin of Covid victims entitled to

compensation, frame guidelines

While mandating guidelines to provide ex gratia, the bench declined to
specify the amount of compensation to be provided.
Observing that the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) had “failed to perform
its duty”, the Supreme Court Wednesday directed it to recommend guidelines within six
weeks for ex gratia to family members of those who lost their lives during the Covid-
19 pandemic.
“It is the statutory duty cast upon the National Authority to recommend guidelines for the
minimum standards of relief to be provided to persons affected by disaster, which shall
include the reliefs,” the bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan and MR Shah said in its ruling,
relying on Section 12 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
The order came on a batch of writ petitions seeking directions to the Central and state
governments to provide ex gratia compensation of Rs 4 lakh under the Disaster
Management Act (DMA) to the family of each who died due to Covid-19.
While mandating guidelines to provide ex gratia, the bench declined to specify the amount of
compensation to be provided.
“No State or country has unlimited resources. That is why it only announces the financial
reliefs/packages to the extent it is possible. When the Government forms its policy, it is based
on a number of circumstances, on facts, law including constraint-based governmental
resources,” it said.
The bench rejected the Centre’s argument that the term “shall” in Section 12 of the DMA be
read as “may” so that it would not be mandatory for the government to frame guidelines for
compensation under the Act.
“The language used in the provision is very plain and unambiguous,” the bench said.
Section 12 of the Act states: The National Authority shall recommend guidelines for the
minimum standards of relief to be provided to persons affected by disaster, which shall
include, — (i) the minimum requirements to be provided in the relief camps in relation to
shelter, food, drinking water, medical cover and sanitation; (ii) the special provisions to be
made for widows and orphans; (iii) ex gratia assistance on account of loss of life as also
assistance on account of damage to houses and for restoration of means of livelihood; (iv)
such other relief as may be necessary.

EXPLAINED
What this can lead to

While the ruling reads the provisions of the Act to the letter and mandates the NDMA to
frame compensation guidelines, it is likely to set a precedent. It also raises questions on the
rationale of the government’s invocation of the Act to tackle the pandemic, a disaster distinct
from natural disasters for which the Act was envisaged.
In March 2020, the Union Home Ministry declared Covid-19 a “Notified Disaster” under the
Disaster Management Act, which allows petitioners to invoke Section 12 of the statute to
seek compensation.
The court refused to accept the government’s argument that mandating ex gratia for those
who died of Covid-19 is beyond the fiscal affordability of states and the Centre when the
pandemic has also been an economic disruption.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had argued that a conscious decision has been taken by the
Finance Commission and/or Union of India to make provision to use the fund from the
National and State Disaster Relief Funds for the purpose of creating infrastructure, hospitals,
testing, vaccination, ICU facilities and providing food to migrant labourers and those below
poverty line instead of paying ex-gratia assistance.
The government also argued that the DMA is not envisaged to provide compensation for the
Covid-19 pandemic which has a lasting or long term impact, unlike other natural disasters
like earthquakes or floods.
The bench, however, held that the government’s arguments “cannot be accepted for the
simple reason that every disaster as defined under Section 2(d) of the Act is a disaster and
once it is declared as a “notified disaster”/national disaster/disaster, Section 12 of DMA 2005
shall be applicable and is mandatorily to be complied with, with respect to any disaster,
within the meaning of Section 2 (d) of DMA 2005.”
Noting that while several states had varying schemes for providing compensation, the bench
said that uniform guidelines at the Central level would be appropriate.
“To avoid any heart-burning and discriminatory treatment, it would be appropriate for the
National Authority to recommend uniform guidelines while providing for the minimum
standards of relief in the form of ex gratia assistance on account of loss of life, as mandated
under Section 12 of the Act,” it said.

Question to be Raised or who solve the issues ?

Ambiguity of words in disaster management act section 12. Still not frame by Central gov. So the
word "shall" and "may" is part of game changer.

Still NDM Cell to help patient and people for compensation no where in india.

Can patient file IPC 304 if negligence under DM Act Under covid -19 Death.

Funeral under Hindu ritual fear and covid-19 death

Orphans child fees to be wave off

Widower and Helpless Parents whose dependent dieid in covid -19

Home death and Treatment

Mediclaim Pending and Customer suffering due to covid-19 cliam.

What IRDA role.?

Adv. Sandeep J Pandey