As of April 17, Madhya Pradesh has 1,120 confirmed cases of COVID-19 - the fifth-highest among all states in India.  The Government of Madhya Pradesh issued one of its initial COVID-19 related orders around January 28, 2020, advising healthcare workers to use appropriate protective gear when examining patients from Wuhan, China.   Since then, the government has taken several actions to contain the spread and impact of COVID-19.  In this blog, we look at key measures taken so far.

Figure 1: Day-wise COVID-19 cases in Madhya Pradesh

image

                                                                                                                                                                                                     

Early stages: Focus on screening international travellers

On January 28, the state government issued directions to monitor international travellers from specified countries, test and maintain surveillance on those who are symptomatic.  A further order required district administrators to monitor and report on all passengers who arrived from China between December 31, 2019 and January 29, 2020.  While efforts were largely focused on screening and testing, the first quarantine restrictions for symptomatic travellers from China, entering India after January 15, were imposed on January 31.  Those leaving quarantine were subsequently kept under surveillance and their health conditions reported on for a period of 14 days.  By February 13, a constant presence of a medical team at the airport was required to test foreign passengers from an increasing list of countries and send daily reports.  

February and early March: Improving public health capacity, restricting social gatherings

The next steps from the government were aimed towards adapting the public health infrastructure to handle the evolving situation.  Following are some of the steps taken in this regard:

  • A helpline, with a dedicated call centre, was set up to inform citizens about COVID-19 and its prevention.
  • The regional directors of the Directorate of Health Services, Government of Madhya Pradesh, were instructed to ensure availability of N-95 masks and PPE kits in their region.
  • The Health Department issued guidelines to the Chief Medical and Health Officials in the State regarding the collection and transport of COVID-19 test samples.
  • Medical professionals in public hospitals were ordered to attend a national training.
  • An order was issued to improve arrangements for quarantine and isolation wards.
  • Leaves were cancelled for all employees/officers of the Health Department. 
  • To grant certain rights to establish effective control over outbreak affected areas and take swift actions, section 71 of the Madhya Pradesh Public Health Act, 1949 was invoked.  This section of the Act provides all Chief Medical and Health Officers and Civil Surgeon cum Chief Hospital Superintendents rights set out therein.  

As the number of cases in India increased through March, the MP government turned focus and issued orders directly concerning their citizens.   Several measures were undertaken to spread awareness about COVID-19 and implement social distancing.  

  • dedicated portal was created for COVID-19 related information.  
  • An order was issued to close several establishments including schools, colleges, cinema halls, gyms and swimming pools.  Biometric attendance was stopped at all government workplaces. 
  • On March 20, the government issued an order (effective till June 15) requiring suppliers of masks and sanitizers to: (i) maintain a fixed price and (ii) keep and present fortnightly, a record of purchase and sales of the essential items.  The order also prevented them from refusing to sell to any customer. 

March 21 Onwards

On March 21, MP reported four cases of COVID-19. On March 23, the government released the Madhya Pradesh Epidemic Diseases, COVID-19 Regulations 2020 to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in the state.  These regulations specify special administrative powers and protocol for hospitals (government and private) to follow while treating COVID-19 patients. These regulations are valid for one year. Over and above general instructions to maintain social distancing and personal hygiene, the government has undertaken specific measures to: (i) increase healthcare capacity, (ii) institute welfare protection for the economically vulnerable population, (iii) strengthen the administrative structure and data collection, and (iv) ensure supply of essential goods and services.  These measures include-

Healthcare measures

  • Preparation of hospitals for the treatment of COVID-19 including postponing elective surgeries, ensuring an adequate supply of PPE kits. 
  • On March 28, the Bhopal Memorial Hospital and Research Centre was designated as a state-level COVID-19 hospital.  This order was reversed on April 15. 
  • District collectors were empowered to appoint doctors and other healthcare workers as required in their districts in a fast-tracked manner.
  • Establishing a telemedicine unit in each of the 51 district hospitals
  • Facilitating the appointment of final year undergraduate nursing students as nurses
  • On March 29, the government launched the SAARTHAK app for daily monitoring and tracking of quarantined and corona positive patients
  • The government released a strategy document to contain COVID-19. This strategy places emphasis on identification of suspected cases, isolation, testing of high-risk contacts, and treatment (called the I. I. T. T. strategy)

Welfare measures

  • One-time financial assistance of Rs 1,000 will be provided to construction labourers
  • One-time financial assistance of Rs 2,000 will be provided to families of Sahariya, Baiga and Bharia tribes
  • Social security pensions for two months will be paid in advance to pensioners
  • People without eligibility slips under the National Food Security Scheme to be allowed to receive ration 

Administrative measures

  • Senior officials were designated to coordinate with various states to resolve issues regarding migrant labour.
  • District Crisis Management groups were formed to coordinate state-level policy and the local implementation machinery.

Supply of essential goods and services

  • On April 8, the government implemented the Essential Services Management Act,1979. The Act among other things, prohibits anyone employed in essential services to refuse to work.
  • E-pass procurement facility was started to ensure smooth inter-district and across states flow of essential goods & services.  

For more information on the spread of COVID-19 and the central and state government response to the pandemic, please see here.

The doctrine of separation of powers implies that each pillar of democracy – the executive, legislature and the judiciary – perform separate functions and act as separate entities.  The executive is vested with the power to make policy decisions and implement laws.  The legislature is empowered to issue enactments.  The judiciary is responsible for adjudicating disputes.  The doctrine is a part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution[1] even though it is not specifically mentioned in its text.  Thus, no law may be passed and no amendment may be made to the Constitution deviating from the doctrine.  Different agencies impose checks and balances upon each other but may not transgress upon each other’s functions.  Thus, the judiciary exercises judicial review over executive and legislative action, and the legislature reviews the functioning of the executive. There have been some cases where the courts have issued laws and policy related orders through their judgements.  These include the Vishakha case where guidelines on sexual harassment were issued by the Supreme Court, the order of the Court directing the Centre to distribute food grains (2010) and the appointment of the Special Investigation Team to replace the High Level Committee established by the Centre for investigating black money deposits in Swiss Banks. In 1983 when Justice Bhagwati introduced public interest litigation in India, Justice Pathak in the same judgement warned against the “temptation of crossing into territory which properly pertains to the Legislature or to the Executive Government”[2].  Justice Katju in 2007 noted that, “Courts cannot create rights where none exist nor can they go on making orders which are incapable of enforcement or violative of other laws or settled legal principles. With a view to see that judicial activism does not become judicial adventurism the courts must act with caution and proper restraint. It needs to be remembered that courts cannot run the government. The judiciary should act only as an alarm bell; it should ensure that the executive has become alive to perform its duties.” [3] While there has been some discussion on the issue of activism by the judiciary, it must be noted that there are also instances of the legislature using its law making powers to reverse the outcome of some  judgements.  (M.J. Antony has referred to a few in his article in the Business Standard here.)  We discuss below some recent instances of the legislature overturning judicial pronouncements by passing laws with retrospective effect. On September 7, 2011 the Parliament passed the Customs Amendment and Validation Bill, 2011 which retrospectively validates all duties imposed and actions taken by certain customs officials who were not authorized under the Customs Act to do the stated acts.  Some of the duties imposed were in fact challenged before the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs vs. Sayed Ali in 2011[4].  The Supreme Court struck down the levy of duties since these were imposed by unauthorised officials.  By passing the Customs Bill, 2011 the Parliament circumvented the judgement and amended the Act to authorize certain officials to levy duties retrospectively, even those that had been held to be illegal by the SC. Another instance of the legislature overriding the decision of the Supreme Court was seen in the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Ordinance, 2009 which was passed into an Act.  The Supreme Court had ruled that the price at which the Centre shall buy sugar from the mill shall include the statutory minimum price (SMP) and an additional amount of profits that the mills share with farmers.[5] The Amendment allowed the Centre to pay a fair and remunerative price (FRP) instead of the SMP.  It also did away with the requirement to pay the additional amount.  The amendment applied to all transactions for purchase of sugar by the Centre since 1974.  In effect, the amendment overruled the Court decision. The executive tried to sidestep the Apex Court decision through the Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 2010.  The Court had issued a writ to the Custodian of Enemy Property to return possession of certain properties to the legal heir of the owner.   Subsequently the Executive issued an Ordinance under which all properties that were divested from the Custodian in favour of legal heirs by a Court order were reverted to him.  The Ordinance lapsed and a Bill was introduced in the Parliament.  The Bill is currently being examined by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs. These examples highlight some instances where the legislature has acted to reverse judicial pronouncements.  The judiciary has also acted in several instances in the grey areas separating its role from that of the executive and the legislature.  The doctrine of separation of powers is not codified in the Indian constitution.  Indeed, it may be difficult to draw a strict line demarcating the separation.  However, it may be necessary for each pillar of the State to evolve a healthy convention that respects the domain of the others.  


[1] Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala  AIR 1973 SC 1461

[2] Bandhua Mukti Morcha  AIR 1984 SC 802

[3] Aravali Golf Club vs. Chander Hass  (2008) 1 SCC (L&S) 289

[4] Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs vs. Sayed Ali (2011) 3 SCC 537

[5] Mahalakshmi Mills vs. Union of India (2009) 16 SCC 569