As of April 22, Uttar Pradesh has seen 1,449 cases of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and accounts for 6.8% of the total cases in India.  Of the 1,449 persons infected of the disease, 173 have recovered and 21 have died (3.1% of the total deaths in India due to the disease).  These proportions are quite lower as compared to the state’s share in the country’s population (16.5% as per Census 2011).  However, the same holds for the number of persons tested for COVID-19 as well, as of the 4.85 lakh persons tested in India, 37,490 persons (7.7%) have been tested in Uttar Pradesh.

To mitigate the spread of COVID-19 in the state, the state government has taken various measures over the past 2-3 months, spanning across areas such as health, law and order, and social welfare.  This includes imposition of lockdown in 16 districts starting March 23, which was extended to the entire state on March 24, before the nation-wide lockdown came into effect.   This blog post looks at the key measures taken by the state government in response to COVID-19 and the lockdown.

Before the lockdown

One of the earliest steps the state government took in response to COVID-19 was on January 27, when it planned to set up a 10-bed isolation ward in every district hospital and medical college, and increased vigilance on the Indo-Nepal border and airports.  Subsequently, on March 15, it ordered all travellers coming from foreign countries to be kept under surveillance and quarantine for a period of 14 days.  Between March 13 and March 17, the government ordered the closure of educational institutionscinema halls, museums, and tourist spots to prevent public gatherings.   On March 20, this was extended to include malls, and all religious, social, and cultural activities.  Further, to prevent unnecessary crowding, government hospitals were ordered to provide emergency services only.

Welfare measures:  The state government also undertook certain relief measures to provide aid to the persons affected due to COVID-19 and the consequent loss of economic activities.  These include: (i) free treatment for all persons infected with COVID-19, (ii) order to all employers to provide 28-days paid leave to infected or quarantined persons under the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, (iii) another order under the Act to all shops and factories to provide paid leave to all workers if the government orders temporary closure of their business, (iv) free one-month ration to 1.65 crore registered construction workers and daily wage labourers for April, and (v) Rs 1,000 per month of direct cash support to 20.4 lakh registered construction workers, and to 15 lakh street vendors and other unregistered workers.

During the lockdown

During the lockdown, the state government’s measures have been aimed towards: (i) strengthening the medical response in the state, (ii) providing relief to various sections of the society from issues being faced during the lockdown, including UP migrants in other states, and (iii) addressing difficulties being faced in the supply of essential goods and services.  For implementation of these measures, the government constituted 11 committees on March 26 for the work related to various departments.  On April 13, similar committees were constituted under the respective Ministers.

Healthcare

Medical facilities:   On March 23, committees were constituted in each district to determine the process for purchase of emergency medical equipment.   On March 25, the government ordered each of the 51 government and private medical colleges in the state to set up isolation wards of 200-300 beds.   It also proposed to conduct training programmes at district-level for AYUSH doctors, nursing staff, retired health workers, and officers of army medical corps.   This was subsequently made more comprehensive by including lab technicians, ward boys, and sweepers.

Testing:  On April 3, the government ordered setting up one testing lab in every medical college, or in a district hospital, in case there is no medical college in the district.   On April 20, the government decided to encourage the use of pool testing within the state to contain the spread of COVID-19.   It also approved consideration of plasma therapy as a treatment option for COVID-19.

Funding:  On April 3, the UP COVID Care Fund was set up for strengthening treatment facilities in medical colleges, and for expenditure on personal protection equipment, test kits, ventilators, isolation and quarantine wards, and telemedicine.  Subsequently, two Ordinances were promulgated on April 8 to deduct the salaries and allowances of Ministers, MLAs, and MLCs for 2020-21 by 30% to donate Rs 20 crore to the UP COVID Care Fund.   Further, Rs 1,509 crore was made available for the Fund by suspending the Local Area Development scheme for legislators for a period of one year.  In addition, the government increased the limit of the Contingency Fund from Rs 600 crore to Rs 1,200 crore through an Ordinance to allow for extra-budgetary expenditure on COVID-19 related measures.

Hotspots:  On April 8, the government sealed the hotspot areas across the state by prohibiting any movement in the area.  Only medical, sanitisation, and doorstep delivery teams are allowed to enter and exit the hotspot areas, and all enterprises are required to be completely closed.  The government has also ordered for door-to-door checking of the residents living in hotspot areas.

Essential goods and services

Other than the distribution of ration, the state government is providing food to persons staying in night shelters, with community kitchens being set up for persons who are unable to cook.  On April 17, the government made access to the Public Distribution System (PDS) universal till June 30, irrespective of the availability of ration card and Aadhaar card.  In case of death of a person, his ration card, maintenance allowance, and other benefits will be provided to his family as per their eligibility.

To prevent profiteering from sale of essential goods, on March 28, the government ordered the shopkeepers to display the price list in their shops.   On March 29, the government decided that the supply of electricity and water will be ensured and these connections will not be cut for one month.  Subsequently, it also ordered that fixed charges for electricity will not be levied for industries during the period of lockdown.  On April 3, the government ordered banks to remain open on holidays so that government relief assistance is available to the beneficiaries.

Migrants

From other states:  On March 26, the state government decided that migrant workers travelling through the state to other states such as Bihar will be provided food and shelter, and sent safely to their destination.  Subsequently, on March 28, the government decided to prepare the list of migrants who came to the state, provide them food, and keep them under surveillance and quarantine.  On April 22, the government allowed migrants from other states to go back to their home state if the respective state government decides to take them back.

From UP:  The state government requested other states to provide food and shelter to the migrants from UP present in their states, and requested the migrants to stay where they are.  To provide further support to migrants, the state government appointed senior administrative and police officials as nodal officers for each state where migrants from UP might be present.  These nodal officers are the main points of contact for migrants living in the respective states.  They are also responsible for coordinating with the respective state government and local administration to ensure the essential needs of migrants such as food and shelter are met, and alleviate their difficulties, if any.

On April 19, the government brought nearly 8,000 students who were studying in Kota back to the state.  The government allowed them to be kept in quarantine in their homes provided they download the Aarogya Setu app.

Economy

The state government is encouraging the purchase of produce by Farmer Producer Organisations directly from farms as an alternate option to mandis.   On April 13, the government formed a committee of officials to prepare a workplan for attracting investment made by countries such as USA and Japan, which is moving out of China, to the state.  In this regard, the government is planning to contact the embassies of various countries.  On April 19, it constituted another committee to work towards providing employment to about 5 lakh migrant workers who have returned to the state in the last 45 days.  On April 20, the government also allowed construction work on expressway projects to begin after preparation of an action plan.  In line with the advisories issued by the central government, the state government decided to provide relaxations from the lockdown in districts with less than 10 cases starting April 20.  The district administrations are preparing action plans for opening up industries in these districts, excluding the ones situated in the hotspot areas.

The government is considering a number of measures to tackle corruption such as the formation of the office of the Lokpal or Ombudsman to investigate corruption cases, the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010 that requires judges to declare their assets, lays down enforceable standards of conduct for judges, and establishes a process for removal of the Supreme Court and High Court judges (see PRS Analysis) and the Public Interest Disclosure and Protection of Persons Making the Disclosure Bill, 2010. In 2004, following the death of whistleblower Satyendra Dubey, the government issued a notification laying down certain guidelines for whistleblowing and protecting whistleblowers.  It introduced the Public Interest Disclosure and Protection of Persons Making the Disclosure Bill, 2010 in August 2010 to give statutory backing to the 2004 government resolution.  Commonly known as the Whistleblower’s Bill, it seeks to protect whistleblowers i.e. persons making a public interest disclosure related to an act of corruption, misuse of power or criminal offence by a public servant.  It designates the Central and State Vigilance Commissions to receive disclosures from whistleblowers and lays down safeguards for protection of whistleblowers (see PRS Analysis). The Bill was referred to the Departmentally related Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice.  The Committee presented its report on June 9, 2011. Key recommendations of the Standing Committee

  • § The Bill seeks to establish a mechanism to register complaints on any allegation of corruption or wilful misuse of power by a public servant.  The Committee broadly agreed with the provisions of the Bill but hoped that the government would consider the recommendations and adopt them wherever found appropriate.
  • § The Bill covers any complaint under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; wilful misuse of power, and a criminal offence by a public servant.  The Committee suggested that the scope of the Bill may be widened to include offences such as maladministration and human rights violations.  Specifically, the Bill should cover accrual of wrongful gain to a third party.  Also, the definition of “public servant” in the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 could be adopted for this Bill.
  • § The Committee proposed that the defence forces and intelligence organisations should be included within the ambit of the Bill.  There could be reasonable exceptions based on operational needs of the forces.  Alternately, a separate authority could be set up for these exempted agencies.  It added that the Bill should cover members of the Council of Ministers, the judiciary (including higher judiciary) and regulatory authorities.
  • § The Bill states that a public interest disclosure can be made only to the Central or State Vigilance Commissions (VCs).  The Committee is of the opinion that this may restrict access especially to population in remote areas.  It recommended that the Rules should provide for a smooth and convenient system.  The Committee added that if there are multiple points at which complaints can be made, the identity of the complainant should be strictly protected.
  • § The Bill does not allow anonymous complaints.  The Committee however suggested that if the anonymous complaints have supporting documents that substantiates the claims, the VCs can investigate it.  It also advised that an alternative mechanism could be set up within or outside the Bill for inquiring into anonymous complaints.
  • § The Committee recommended that there should be a foolproof mechanism to ensure that the identity of the complainant is not compromised with at any cost.  This is especially important because without such a mechanism it would deter prospective complainants due to fear of harassment and victimisation.
  • § The Bill allows the VCs to reveal the identity of the complainant to the head of the organisation if it is necessary to do so.  The Committee recommended that the identity of the complainant should not be revealed to the head of the organisation without the written consent of the complainant.
  • § The Committee felt that undue burden should not be placed on the complainant to provide proof to substantiate his case.  As long as he is able to make out a prima facie case, the VCs should follow up on the case.
  • § The Committee is of the view that the VCs should inform the complainant about the outcome of the complaint.  Also, the VCs should give reasons if it decides to dismiss a complaint and the complainant should be given a reasonable hearing if he is not satisfied with the dismissal.
  • § The Committee proposed that there should be a time limit for conducting discreet inquiry by the VCs, for inquiry by the head of the organisation and for taking action on the recommendations of the VCs.  The authority would have to give reasons in writing if it wants the time limit to be extended.  There should also be some mechanism to ensure that the directions of the VC are not avoided to protect the wrongdoer.
  • § The Bill states that the VCs shall not entertain any complaints made five years after the action.  However, the Committee is not convinced that this restriction should be prescribed.  If at all there has to be a time limit, exceptions should be made in case of complaints which prima facie reveal offences of a grave nature.
  • § The Committee recommended that the term “victimisation” should be defined and the whistleblower should be provided with sufficient protection to protect him from violence.  Also, witnesses and other persons who support the whistleblower should be accorded the same protection.
  • § The Committee strongly recommended that there should be a mechanism to ensure that the orders of the VCs are complied with. Stringent action should be taken against any person who does not comply with the order.
  • § The Committee felt that the penalty for frivolous or malafide complaints was too high and should be substantially reduced.  Also, while deciding whether a disclosure is frivolous, the intention of the complainant should be examined rather than the outcome of the inquiry.  The complainant should also have the right to appeal to the High Court.