The Evening Wrap: What’s the decision on ex gratia for Covid-19 victims’ kin, SC asks Centre

The Supreme Court on Monday asked the government whether it has taken a "decision" to not pay ex gratia to families who lost their loved ones to Covid-19. "Is there any decision taken that there is no need to pay ex gratia? Is there a decision or is it a case of 'no decision" Justice Ashok Bhushan asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta. "Where is the decision that there is no need for ex gratia?" Justice M.R. Shah, the other judge on the Bench, also enquired. He even asked whether the government, by maintaining that Covid-19 was not a "one-time disaster", was inferring that the Disaster Management Act would not apply to the pandemic. The questions from the Bench came even as the Union government clarified that it had money, but the focus was on utilising funds for food, medical care, oxygen, vaccination and pumping up the economy rather than pay a one-time compensation of ₹4 lakh each to families of people who died of Covid-19. "It is not that we do not have money… It is that our focus is rather on expenditure of money for other things [like public health interventions, social protection and economic recovery for the affected communities, etc]," Mehta submitted. He said the contents of the government's June 19 affidavit, explaining its financial priorities for Covid-19 management, was "twisted" and misrepresented on Twitter. Justice Shah said the government need not defend itself in court against what was said on Twitter. He, however, agreed that Mehta was right to clarify. "To say that the Centre has no money has wide repercussions," he observed. Senior advocate S.B. Upadhyay, for the petitioners, said, "But if they do have the money, why should they not comply with their statutory obligation under Section 12 of the Disaster Management Act to provide ex gratia assistance to Covid-19 victims?" The government had itself declared Covid-19 a national disaster, he submitted. The petitioners have highlighted a 2015 notification, which requires the government to pay an ex gratia of ₹4 lakh each to victims' families under Section 12. The Centre cannot cite financial constraints to elude its statutory duty to pay compensation now, Upadhyay contended. Justice Shah, highlighting the petitioners' argument for framing uniform guidelines on disaster compensation, reasoned that disasters and pandemics varied in impact. One relief cannot fit all tragedies. "Every disaster has a different impact. There may be a big or a small disaster. There may be a big or a small pandemic. There may be a flood where the victims are less. The gravity of a global pandemic is high. You cannot apply the same standards of a small disaster or a smaller pandemic to a global pandemic," he addressed Upadhyay. Advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal, a petitioner, said, "The amount can be less small or big, but some help needs to be given to families, some of whom have lost their sole breadwinners. Families of frontline warriors who lost their lives in the line of duty cannot be left in a lurch". Mehta said Section 12 was only "recommendatory" in nature. He referred to the 15th Finance Commission report for 2021-2026 to argue that the funds for disaster management and their allocations were already fixed. Justice Shah asked, "So, the Finance Commission fixes ₹15,000 crore on disaster management. Then Covid-19 happens. You need ₹25,000 crore on disaster management. Can you say that you will only spend ₹15,000 crore?". Mehta replied, "We will have to go back to Parliament. It will have to be ratified by Parliament". Justice Shah stated, "Remember, a Finance Commission report cannot override a statutory provision [Section 12].The court has reserved the petitions for judgment. Class 12: Optional exams 'anytime between August 15 and September 15' The CBSE informed the Supreme Court on Monday that optional exams for Class 12 students unhappy with their assessment will be held "anytime between" August 15 and September 15. The CBSE clarified that results after the assessment would be declared by July 31. The Board, in a short additional affidavit, told the court that Class 12 exams for private/patrachar/second chance compartment candidates would also be conducted between August 15 and September 15 in accordance with the assessment policy for the academic year 2019-2020. "Their examinations shall be conducted in such a manner that they will fall within the Assessment Policy for the Academic Year 2019-2020 as approved by this court… Their results shall be declared in accordance with the said Assessment Policy. Their examinations shall also be conducted anytime between 15.08.2021 to 15.09.2021, subject to conducive situation," the affidavit read. This is when over 1,100 CBSE students have already approached the court seeking the cancellation of compartment, private and repeat exams for Class 12 this year. These petitions have urged the court to direct evaluation through an assessment formula in line with the regular CBSE students. The CBSE affidavit said it has issued a 'Policy for Tabulation of Marks for Class XII Board Examination 2021' to ensure standardisation of marks. "Marks of Classes 11 and 12 components will be awarded at school level. Therefore, they will strictly not be comparable across schools due to variations in the quality of question papers, the evaluation standard and processes, the mode of conduct of exams, etc. To ensure standardisation, each school will have to internally moderate the marks to account for the school level variations by using a reliable reference standard," the CBSE said. The Board said a "reliable reference standard" was necessary in the "interest of fairness and to ensure that marks allocated are comparable and there is no adverse impact or undue gain for any student because of the methodology/process of evaluation used by individual schools". In a hearing on Monday before a Bench led by Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, senior advocate Vikas Singh, who is arguing for the conduct of physical exams, said there should be uniform criteria for assessment for CBSE and ICSE marks. But Justice Khanwilkar said apples and oranges cannot be mixed. He referred to how school performance in past years would also influence marks, saying students' performances should be based on their own work and not of past batches. Singh said the current assessment policy of the CBSE was complicated and physical exams should be held as the Covid-19 situation was getting better. But Justice Khanwilkar said the future of students cannot be rendered uncertain. "They need to have some ray of hope," Justice Khanwilkar said. The court said it would not modify its order clearing the assessment policy proposed by the CBSE and the ICSE. Poll strategist Prashant Kishor meets Sharad Pawar for second time in a month over anti-BJP front Poll strategist Prashant Kishor on Monday met Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) supremo Sharad Pawar in New Delhi, their second meeting this month amid heightened speculation about the possible formation of a Third Front to take on the BJP, PTI reported. The closed-door discussions between Kishor and Pawar at the latter's residence lasted for about one-and-a-half hours, sources said. The meeting comes a day before the NCP's general body meeting scheduled to be held at Pawar's residence. Kishor, who is said to have been instrumental in the Trinamool Congress's victory in the recent West Bengal Assembly elections, had also met Pawar on June 11, fuelling the talk of opposition parties coming together against the BJP. According to sources, former finance minister and now a TMC leader Yashwant Sinha, Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) leader Manoj Jha, and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Sanjay Singh are also expected to call on Pawar on Tuesday. Kishor, who had been part of the BJP's 2014 Lok Sabha campaign, later became a poll strategist for several non-NDA parties. He had handled the poll strategy of the TMC in the West Bengal Assembly polls and for the DMK in the Tamil Nadu assembly elections this year. He had also been a poll strategist for the Janata Dal-United (JD-U) and Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) alliance in the 2015 Bihar assembly polls. Nobel Laureate Esther Deflo, Raghuram Rajan, Jean Dreze, to join TN economic council The Tamil Nadu government will constitute an Economic Advisory Council to the Chief Minister to chart out a rapid and inclusive economic growth path for the State, said Governor Banwarilal Purohit on Monday. The council will include Nobel laureate Esther Duflo of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), former Reserve Bank Governor Raghuram Rajan, former Chief Economic Advisor to the Centre, Arvind Subramanian, Development Economist Jean Dreze, and former Union Finance Secretary S. Narayan. "Based on the recommendation of the council, the government will revitalise the State's economy and ensure that benefits of economic growth reach all segments of society," said Purohit in his address to the State Legislative Assembly. He said that as the first step towards bringing down the overall debt burden and improving fiscal position, a white paper detailing the true state of the State's finances would be released in July so that the people were fully informed. The Governor also announced the government's decision to introduce a separate annual budget for agriculture with the objective of increasing productivity and protecting farmers' welfare. "The government will take all steps to achieve the target of 125 metric tonnes of food production in 2021-22," he said, adding that water for Kuruvai cultivation had already been released. SC urges Centre to simplify Covid-19 death certification process The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Union government what it plans to do in cases of Covid-19 patients whose death certificates cited some other reason for the cause of death. "What is the remedy in the case of Covid-19 patients who have already been issued death certificates showing some other reason as cause of death", Justice M.R. Shah, who accompanied Justice Ashok Bhushan on the Bench, asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta. The court suggested that the government should simplify the process for certification of Covid-19 deaths. It asked the government whether the reason of death could be given as Covid-19 in the certificate if the family could produce a Covid-19 report, no matter whether the patient died in a hospital or outside. The court pointed out that some patients were not even given their medical records. Mehta reiterated the government's stand that any lapse in stating Covid-19 as the cause of demise in a death certificate would have penal consequences for those found responsible, including the certifying doctor. In its affidavit on Sunday, the Centre said, "It is mandated that any death resulting from Covid-19 shall have to be so certified i.e. as Covid death, failing which, everyone responsible, including the certifying doctor, shall be responsible for penal consequences". The government stated that deaths with the diagnosis of Covid-19, irrespective of comorbidities, have to be certified as pandemic deaths. The only exception to the rule was when there was a clear alternative cause of death, for example, accidental trauma, poisoning, etc. The Supreme Court recently told the Centre that the death certificates of those who died of Covid-19 often do not reveal that fact. "The death certificates of persons who die from Covid-19 in hospitals show the reason as lung or heart problem or something else," Justice Shah had addressed Mehta. "All deaths with the diagnosis of Covid-19, irrespective of co-morbidities, are to be classified as deaths due to Covid-19," the Centre had clarified in the affidavit. Covid Watch: Numbers and Developments The number of reported coronavirus cases from India stood at 2,99,65,891 at the time of publishing this newsletter, with the death toll at 3,88,859. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow.

The Evening Wrap 21 JUNE 2021

Welcome to the Evening Wrap newsletter, your guide to the day's biggest stories with concise analysis from The Hindu.

Open in browser More newsletters

What's the decision on ex gratia for Covid-19 victims' kin, SC asks Centre The Supreme Court on Monday asked the government whether it has taken a "decision" to not pay ex gratia to families who lost their loved ones to Covid-19. "Is there any decision taken that there is no need to pay ex gratia? Is there a decision or is it a case of 'no decision" Justice Ashok Bhushan asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta. "Where is the decision that there is no need for ex gratia?" Justice M.R. Shah, the other judge on the Bench, also enquired. He even asked whether the government, by maintaining that Covid-19 was not a "one-time disaster", was inferring that the Disaster Management Act would not apply to the pandemic.   The questions from the Bench came even as the Union government clarified that it had money, but the focus was on utilising funds for food, medical care, oxygen, vaccination and pumping up the economy rather than pay a one-time compensation of ₹4 lakh each to families of people who died of Covid-19. "It is not that we do not have money… It is that our focus is rather on expenditure of money for other things [like public health interventions, social protection and economic recovery for the affected communities, etc]," Mehta submitted. He said the contents of the government's June 19 affidavit, explaining its financial priorities for Covid-19 management, was "twisted" and misrepresented on Twitter. Justice Shah said the government need not defend itself in court against what was said on Twitter. He, however, agreed that Mehta was right to clarify. "To say that the Centre has no money has wide repercussions," he observed. Senior advocate S.B. Upadhyay, for the petitioners, said, "But if they do have the money, why should they not comply with their statutory obligation under Section 12 of the Disaster Management Act to provide ex gratia assistance to Covid-19 victims?" The government had itself declared Covid-19 a national disaster, he submitted. The petitioners have highlighted a 2015 notification, which requires the government to pay an ex gratia of ₹4 lakh each to victims' families under Section 12. The Centre cannot cite financial constraints to elude its statutory duty to pay compensation now, Upadhyay contended. Justice Shah, highlighting the petitioners' argument for framing uniform guidelines on disaster compensation, reasoned that disasters and pandemics varied in impact. One relief cannot fit all tragedies. "Every disaster has a different impact. There may be a big or a small disaster. There may be a big or a small pandemic. There may be a flood where the victims are less. The gravity of a global pandemic is high. You cannot apply the same standards of a small disaster or a smaller pandemic to a global pandemic," he addressed Upadhyay. Advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal, a petitioner, said, "The amount can be less small or big, but some help needs to be given to families, some of whom have lost their sole breadwinners. Families of frontline warriors who lost their lives in the line of duty cannot be left in a lurch". Mehta said Section 12 was only "recommendatory" in nature. He referred to the 15th Finance Commission report for 2021-2026 to argue that the funds for disaster management and their allocations were already fixed. Justice Shah asked, "So, the Finance Commission fixes ₹15,000 crore on disaster management. Then Covid-19 happens. You need ₹25,000 crore on disaster management. Can you say that you will only spend ₹15,000 crore?". Mehta replied, "We will have to go back to Parliament. It will have to be ratified by Parliament". Justice Shah stated, "Remember, a Finance Commission report cannot override a statutory provision [Section 12].The court has reserved the petitions for judgment. Class 12: Optional exams 'anytime between August 15 and September 15' The CBSE informed the Supreme Court on Monday that optional exams for Class 12 students unhappy with their assessment will be held "anytime between" August 15 and September 15. The CBSE clarified that results after the assessment would be declared by July 31. The Board, in a short additional affidavit, told the court that Class 12 exams for private/patrachar/second chance compartment candidates would also be conducted between August 15 and September 15 in accordance with the assessment policy for the academic year 2019-2020. "Their examinations shall be conducted in such a manner that they will fall within the Assessment Policy for the Academic Year 2019-2020 as approved by this court… Their results shall be declared in accordance with the said Assessment Policy. Their examinations shall also be conducted anytime between 15.08.2021 to 15.09.2021, subject to conducive situation," the affidavit read. This is when over 1,100 CBSE students have already approached the court seeking the cancellation of compartment, private and repeat exams for Class 12 this year. These petitions have urged the court to direct evaluation through an assessment formula in line with the regular CBSE students. The CBSE affidavit said it has issued a 'Policy for Tabulation of Marks for Class XII Board Examination 2021' to ensure standardisation of marks. "Marks of Classes 11 and 12 components will be awarded at school level. Therefore, they will strictly not be comparable across schools due to variations in the quality of question papers, the evaluation standard and processes, the mode of conduct of exams, etc. To ensure standardisation, each school will have to internally moderate the marks to account for the school level variations by using a reliable reference standard," the CBSE said. The Board said a "reliable reference standard" was necessary in the "interest of fairness and to ensure that marks allocated are comparable and there is no adverse impact or undue gain for any student because of the methodology/process of evaluation used by individual schools". In a hearing on Monday before a Bench led by Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, senior advocate Vikas Singh, who is arguing for the conduct of physical exams, said there should be uniform criteria for assessment for CBSE and ICSE marks. But Justice Khanwilkar said apples and oranges cannot be mixed. He referred to how school performance in past years would also influence marks, saying students' performances should be based on their own work and not of past batches. Singh said the current assessment policy of the CBSE was complicated and physical exams should be held as the Covid-19 situation was getting better. But Justice Khanwilkar said the future of students cannot be rendered uncertain. "They need to have some ray of hope," Justice Khanwilkar said. The court said it would not modify its order clearing the assessment policy proposed by the CBSE and the ICSE. Poll strategist Prashant Kishor meets Sharad Pawar for second time in a month over anti-BJP front Poll strategist Prashant Kishor on Monday met Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) supremo Sharad Pawar in New Delhi, their second meeting this month amid heightened speculation about the possible formation of a Third Front to take on the BJP, PTI reported. The closed-door discussions between Kishor and Pawar at the latter's residence lasted for about one-and-a-half hours, sources said. The meeting comes a day before the NCP's general body meeting scheduled to be held at Pawar's residence.   Kishor, who is said to have been instrumental in the Trinamool Congress's victory in the recent West Bengal Assembly elections, had also met Pawar on June 11, fuelling the talk of opposition parties coming together against the BJP. According to sources, former finance minister and now a TMC leader Yashwant Sinha, Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) leader Manoj Jha, and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Sanjay Singh are also expected to call on Pawar on Tuesday. Kishor, who had been part of the BJP's 2014 Lok Sabha campaign, later became a poll strategist for several non-NDA parties. He had handled the poll strategy of the TMC in the West Bengal Assembly polls and for the DMK in the Tamil Nadu assembly elections this year. He had also been a poll strategist for the Janata Dal-United (JD-U) and Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) alliance in the 2015 Bihar assembly polls. Nobel Laureate Esther Deflo, Raghuram Rajan, Jean Dreze, to join TN economic council The Tamil Nadu government will constitute an Economic Advisory Council to the Chief Minister to chart out a rapid and inclusive economic growth path for the State, said Governor Banwarilal Purohit on Monday. The council will include Nobel laureate Esther Duflo of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), former Reserve Bank Governor Raghuram Rajan, former Chief Economic Advisor to the Centre, Arvind Subramanian, Development Economist Jean Dreze, and former Union Finance Secretary S. Narayan. "Based on the recommendation of the council, the government will revitalise the State's economy and ensure that benefits of economic growth reach all segments of society," said Purohit in his address to the State Legislative Assembly. He said that as the first step towards bringing down the overall debt burden and improving fiscal position, a white paper detailing the true state of the State's finances would be released in July so that the people were fully informed. The Governor also announced the government's decision to introduce a separate annual budget for agriculture with the objective of increasing productivity and protecting farmers' welfare. "The government will take all steps to achieve the target of 125 metric tonnes of food production in 2021-22," he said, adding that water for Kuruvai cultivation had already been released. SC urges Centre to simplify Covid-19 death certification process The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Union government what it plans to do in cases of Covid-19 patients whose death certificates cited some other reason for the cause of death. "What is the remedy in the case of Covid-19 patients who have already been issued death certificates showing some other reason as cause of death", Justice M.R. Shah, who accompanied Justice Ashok Bhushan on the Bench, asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta. The court suggested that the government should simplify the process for certification of Covid-19 deaths. It asked the government whether the reason of death could be given as Covid-19 in the certificate if the family could produce a Covid-19 report, no matter whether the patient died in a hospital or outside. The court pointed out that some patients were not even given their medical records. Mehta reiterated the government's stand that any lapse in stating Covid-19 as the cause of demise in a death certificate would have penal consequences for those found responsible, including the certifying doctor. In its affidavit on Sunday, the Centre said, "It is mandated that any death resulting from Covid-19 shall have to be so certified i.e. as Covid death, failing which, everyone responsible, including the certifying doctor, shall be responsible for penal consequences". The government stated that deaths with the diagnosis of Covid-19, irrespective of comorbidities, have to be certified as pandemic deaths. The only exception to the rule was when there was a clear alternative cause of death, for example, accidental trauma, poisoning, etc. The Supreme Court recently told the Centre that the death certificates of those who died of Covid-19 often do not reveal that fact. "The death certificates of persons who die from Covid-19 in hospitals show the reason as lung or heart problem or something else," Justice Shah had addressed Mehta. "All deaths with the diagnosis of Covid-19, irrespective of co-morbidities, are to be classified as deaths due to Covid-19," the Centre had clarified in the affidavit. Covid Watch: Numbers and Developments The number of reported coronavirus cases from India stood at 2,99,65,891 at the time of publishing this newsletter, with the death toll at 3,88,859. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow.

Today's Top Picks

Vaccination drive | Record 80 lakh doses given on day one of revised guidelines Talking Politics with Nistula Hebbar | Centre's invitation to 14 J&K leaders   Vijay's 'Thalapathy 65' titled 'Beast' Legendary sprinter Usain Bolt welcomes newborn twin sons

Copyright @ 2021, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD.

If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please try here If you do not wish to receive such emails go here