CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION versus UNION OF INDIA on 18 August 2020

[2020] 11 S.C.R. 425

CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

v.

UNION OF INDIA

(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 546 of 2020)

AUGUST 18, 2020

[ASHOK BHUSHAN, R. SUBHASH REDDY AND

M. R. SHAH, JJ. ]

Disaster Management Act, 2005 – s.11 – National Plan –COVID-19 – Pandemic – A Public Interest Litigation filed in thewake of COVID-19 pandemic seeking direction to the Union ofIndia to prepare, notify and implement a National Plan u/s. 11 r/w.s.10 of the Act, 2005 to deal with current pandemic (COVID-19) –Petitioner submitted that National Plan uploaded on the website ofNational Disaster Management Authority of the year 2019 doesnot deal with situations arising out of the current pandemic andhas no mention of measures like lockdown, containment zones, socialdistancing etc. – Held: The first National Plan u/s. 11 was framedin the year 2016, which was revised and the National Plan wasprepared and notified in November, 2019 – National Plan andguidelines as contemplated by the statute for Disaster Managementis by its very nature prior to the occurrence of any disaster and asa measure of preparedness – It is not conceivable that a NationalPlan would be framed after the disaster has occurred – A NationalPlan encompasses and contemplate all kinds of disasters – TheBiological and Public health emergencies has already beencontemplated in the National Plan, 2019, which as notified in table1-1 under paragraph 1.13.1 specifically includes epidemics: Viral,Bacterial, Parasitic, Fungal and prior infections – NovelCoronavirus is an epidemic which has become pandemic – Plan-2019 is complemented by several plans, Standard OperatingProcedures (SOPs), manuals, Guidelines at all levels of theGovernment – Further, the National Disaster Management Authorityhad issued guidelines in the year 2008 itself which has been furtherdetailed in Plan-2019 – All aspects of the epidemics, all measuresto contain an epidemic, preparedness, response, mitigation havebeen elaborately dealt in Plan-2019 – The Disaster ManagementAct, 2005 contain ample powers and measures, which can be taken

A

B

CD

EF

G

H

Aby the National Disaster Management Authority, National ExecutiveCommittee and Central Government to prepare further plans,guidelines and Standard Operating Procedure (SOPs), which inrespect to COVID-19 have done from time to time – ContainmentPlan for COVID-19 was also issued – There are no lack of guidelines,SOPs and Plan to contain COVID-19 — Nodal Ministry has broughtBon record updated containment plan for large outbreaks of COVID-19 – Guidelines and orders have been issued from time to time toregulate all measures to contain COVID-19 – Thus, there is no meritin the submission of the petitioner that there is no sufficient plan todeal with COVID-19 pandemic – National Plan, 2019 have beenCthere in place supplemented by various orders and measures takenby competent authorities under Disaster Management Act, 2005,there is no occasion or need to issue any direction to Union ofIndia to prepare a fresh National Plan for COVID-19.

Disaster Management Act, 2005 – s.12 – Guidelines forDMinimum Standards of Relief – COVID-19 – Pandemic – A publicinterest litigation filed in wake of COVID-19 pandemic, seekingdirection to the Union of India to lay down minimum standards ofrelief u/s. 12 of the Act, 2005 to be provided to persons affectedwith COVID-19 – The petitioner pleaded that Centre should comeup with detailed guidelines recommending the minimum standardsEof relief to be provided in the relief camps in relation to shelter,food, drinking water, medical cover and sanitation, in absence ofwhich, shelter homes and relief camps are susceptible of becominghotbeds for the spread of COVID-19 infection – It was furtherpleaded that the Centre should come up with detailed guidelinesFunder s.12(ii) and (iii) of Act, 2005 for widows and orphans andex-gratia assistance to be provided to the kith and kin of thoselosing life because of COVID-19 infections but also as a result ofharsh lockdown restrictions – It was also submitted that there areno guidelines providing for minimum standards of relief for COVID-19 – Held: The respondent has brought on record the guidelinesGwhich were in existence before declaration of COVID-19 pandemicand it covers all statutory requirement as enumerated in s.12 – Theuniform guidelines are contemplated so that persons affected bydisaster are provided with minimum requirement in the relief campsin respect of shelter, food, drinking water, medical cover andH

sanitation and other reliefs as contemplated in the section – Therebeing already guidelines for minimum standards in place even beforeCOVID-19, the said guidelines for minimum standards holds goodeven for those who are affected by COVID-19 – Further, Governmentof India has treated COVID-19 as a notified disaster for the purposeof providing assistance under State Disaster Response Fund, normsof assistance for ex-gratia payment to families of deceased personsand other assistance – Therefore, Union of India is not obliged tolay down minimum standard of relief u/s.12 and guidelines issuedu/s.12 providing for minimum standards of relief holds good forpandemic COVID-19 also.

Disaster Management Act, 2005 – s. 46 – National DisasterResponse Fund – COVID-19 – Pandemic – Public Interest Litigation– The submissions of the petitioner centre around National DisasterResponse Fund (NDRF) and PM CARES Fund – It was submittedthat the earlier guidelines for administration of NDRF which cameinto force with effect from financial year 2010-11 have beenmodified by new guidelines with effect from financial year2015-16, and now it is not possible for any person or institution tomake contribution to the NDRF and it was further submitted thatdeletion of paragraph 5.5 of earlier guidelines makes it clear thatit is not possible for any person or institution to make anycontribution to NDRF – It was contended that paragraph 5.5 of theearlier guidelines was deleted to benefit the PM CARES Fund –Held: New guidelines contain the same heading, i.e. ‘Contributionto the NDRF’ and guideline 5.2 provides ‘Funds will be creditedinto the NDRF in accordance with the provisions of the s. 46(1)(a)& (b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 – The above guideline5.2 specifically referred to s. 46(1)(a) & (b) and s. 46(1)(b) expresslyprovides that any grants that may be made by any person or institutionfor the purpose of disaster management shall be credited to NDRF– Thus, the submission that it is not possible for any person orinstitution to make any contribution to the NDRF is incorrect – So,any contribution, grant of any individual or institution is notprohibited to be credited into the NDRF and it is still open for anyperson or institution to make contribution to the NDRF in terms ofs. 46(1)(b) of the Act, 2005 – Further, the contribution by any personor by any institution in PM CARES Fund is voluntary and it is openfor any person or institution to make contribution to the PM CARESFund.

AB

C

D

E

F

G

H

A

AB

C

D

E

F

G

H

A

ADisaster Management Act, 2005 – s. 46 – COVID-19 –Pandemic – NDRF and PM CARES Fund – Public Interest Litigation– After outbreak of Pandemic COVID-19, need of having a dedicatednational fund with objective of dealing with any kind of emergencyor distress situation, like posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, a fundwas created, namely, PM CARES Fund – It was contended that allBthe contributions/ grants from individuals/institutions to be creditedin NDRF and not to PM CARES Fund and all the funds collected inPM CARES Fund till date should be directed to be transferred toNDRF – Held: As per the new guidelines, 2015-16 expenditure fromNDRF is meant to assist a State to provide immediate relief in thoseCcases of severe calamity, where the expenditure required is in excessof the balance in the State’s SDRMF – The Centre has released firstintalment of Rs.11,092/- crores out of 22,184/- crores which wasthe Central share of SDRMF and there is nothing on record thatany State has exceeded the expenditure in excess of the balance inthe State’s SDMRF, there is no occasion of asking more fund by theDState from NDRF – Whereas, the PM CARES Fund has beenconstituted as a public charitable trust in the year 2020 – Underthe guidelines which were in existence with effect from financialyear 2015-16, neither NDRF nor SDRMF covered the bioligicaland public health emergencies – No contribution by any person orEinstitution in the NDRF could have been made prior to the notificationdated 14.03.2002, which notified COVID-19 as disaster – Theoutbreak of COVID-19 required immediate enhancement in theinfrastructure of medical health and creation of fund to containCOVID-19 – PM CARES Fund was constituted to have necessaryfinancial resources to meet the emergent situation – The NDRF andFPM CARES Fund are two entirely different funds with different objectand purpose – The funds collected in the PM CARES are funds of apublic charitable trust and there is no occasion for issuing anydirection to transfer the said funds to the NDRF.

Dismissing the writ petition, the CourtG

HELD: 1. I) Whether the Union of India under Section 11of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, is obliged to prepare,notify and implement a National Disaster Management Planspecifically for pandemic COVID-19 irrespective of NationalDisaster Management Plan notified in November, 2019?H

1.1 The Biological and Public Health Emergencies hasalready been contemplated in the National Plan, 2019, which asnoticed in table 1-1 under paragraph 1.13.1 specifically includesepidemics: Viral, Bacterial, Parasitic, Fungal and prion infections.Novel Coronavirus is an epidemic which has become a pandemic.[Para 36][454-C]

1.2 Thus, the National Disaster Management Authority waswell aware of the epidemics and had issued guidelines in the year2008 itself which has been further detailed in Plan-2019. Allaspects of the epidemics, all measures to contain an epidemic,preparedness, response, mitigation have been elaborately dealtin Plan, 2019. Unless the National Plan as contemplated underSection 11 contains all aspects of disaster including the Biologicaland Public Health Emergencies, it will not be possible for theGovernments to immediately respond and contain an epidemic.[Para 38][454-H; 455-A]

1.3 The Disaster Management Act, 2005 contain amplepowers and measures, which can be taken by the National DisasterManagement Authority, National Executive Committee andCentral Government to prepare further plans, guidelines andStandard Operating Procedure (SOPs), which in respect toCOVID-19 have been done from time to time. Containment Planfor Novel Coronavirus, 2019 has been issued by Ministry ofHealth and Family Welfare, Government of India, copy of whichupdated up to 16.05.2020 has been brought on record asAnnexure-R4. There are no lack of guidelines, SOPs and Plan tocontain COVID-19, by Nodal Ministry and Annexure R-6 hasbeen brought on record issued by Ministry of Health and FamilyWelfare, Government of India, i.e., Updated Containment Planfor Large Outbreaks Novel Coronavirus Disease, 2019(COVID-19). [Para 39][455-B-D]

1.4 National Executive Committee as well as Nodal Ministryhas issued guidelines and orders from time to time to regulateall measures to contain COVID-19. The petitioners are not rightin their submissions that there is no sufficient plan to deal withCOVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 being a Biological and PublicHealth Emergency, which has been specifically covered byNational Plan, 2019, which is supplemented by various plans, A

B

C

D

EF

GH

Aguidelines and measures, there is no lack or dearth of plans andprocedures to deal with COVID-19. [Para 40][455-E]

1.5 This Court does not find any merit in the claim of thepetitioner that Union of India be directed to prepare a NationalPlan under Section 11 for COVID-19. National Plan, 2019 haveBalready been there in place supplemented by various orders andmeasures taken by competent authorities under DisasterManagement Act, 2005, there is no occasion or need to issueany direction to Union of India to prepare a fresh National Planfor COVID-19. Thus, the Union of India is not obliged to prepare,notify and implement a fresh National Disaster Management PlanCfor COVID-19. [Para 42][456-A-B]

2. II) Whether the Union of India was obliged to lay downthe minimum standards of relief under Section 12 of Act, 2005,for COVID-19 irrespective of earlier guidelines issued underSection 12 of the Act laying down the minimum standards of relief?D

2.1 The guidelines brought on record which were inexistence since before declaration of COVID-19 pandemic,covers all statutory requirement as enumerated in Section 12.Section 12 contemplates minimum standards of relief to beprovided to persons affected by disaster. The word ‘disaster’Ementioned in Section 12 encompasses all the disasters includingthe present disaster. Section 12 does not contemplate that thereshall be different guidelines for minimum standards of relief fordifferent disasters. [Para 45][457-D-E]

2.2 The uniform guidelines are contemplated so thatFpersons affected by disaster are provided with minimumrequirement in the relief camps in respect of shelter, food,drinking water, medical cover and sanitation and other reliefs ascontemplated in the section. There being already guidelines forminimum standards in place even before COVID-19, the saidGguidelines for minimum standards holds good even for those whoare affected by COVID-19. Section 12 does not contemplate thatafresh guidelines for the minimum standards of relief be issuedwith regard to COVID-19. The prayer of the petitioner to directthe Union of India to issue fresh guidelines under Section 12 to H

be provided to persons infected with COVID-19 is misconceived.[Para 46][457-F-G]

3. (III) Whether Union of India is obliged to utilise NationalDisaster Response Fund created under Section 46 of the Act forthe purpose of providing assistance in the fight of COVID-19?

IV) Whether all the contributions/grants from individualsand institutions should be credited to the NDRF in terms ofSection 46(1)(b) of the Act rather than PM CARES Fund?

V) Whether all the funds collected in the PM CARES Fundtill date be directed to be transferred to the NDRF?

3.1 All the three questions being inter-related are takentogether. The submissions of the petitioner centre aroundNational Disaster Response Fund (NDRF) and PM CARES Fund.[Para 49][458-E]

3.2 The guidelines for administration of the NDRF havebeen revised with effect from financial year 2015-16 which havebeen brought on record. As per paragraph 10 of the newguidelines, expenditure from NDRF is meant to assist a State toprovide immediate relief in those cases of severe calamity, wherethe expenditure required is in excess of the balance in the State’sSDRF. The NDRF is a statutory fund required to be audited bythe Comptroller & Auditor General of India, which was constitutedunder Act, 2005 and is still in existence for the purposes asenumerated in the statute as well as in the guidelines issued underAct, 2005. [Paras 55 and 57][461-D-E; 462-D-E]

3.3 The PM CARES Fund has been constituted as a publiccharitable trust. After outbreak of pandemic COVID-19, need ofhaving a dedicated national fund with objective of dealing withany kind of emergency or distress situation, like posed by theCOVID-19 pandemic, and to provide relief to the affected, a fundwas created by constituting a trust with Prime Minister as anex-officio Chairman of PM CARES Fund, with other ex-officioand nominated Trustees of the Fund. The PM CARES Fundconsists entirely of voluntary contributions from individuals/organisations and does not get any Budgetary support. NoGovernment money is credited in the PM CARES Fund.[Para 59][464-A-C]

A

B

C

DE

F

G

H

432SUPREME COURT REPORTS

A3.4 Firstly, paragraph 5.5 of earlier guidelines whichcontemplated contributions by any person or institution for thepurpose of disaster management to the NDRF are very muchstill there in the new guidelines, which have come into force witheffect from financial year 2015-16. New guidelines contain thesame heading, i.e., “Contribution to the NDRF” and guidelineB5.2 provides “Funds will be credited into the NDRF in accordancewith the provisions of the Section 46(1)(a) & (b) of the DisasterManagement Act, 2005.” The above guideline 5.2 specificallyreferred to Section 46(1)(a) & (b) and Section 46(1)(b) expresslyprovides that any grants that may be made by any person orCinstitution for the purpose of disaster management shall becredited into the NDRF. The submission that after the newguidelines, it is not possible for any person or institution to makeany contribution to the NDRF is, thus, misconceived and incorrect.According to the statutory provisions of Section 46 as well asnew guidelines enforced with effect from financial year 2015-16Dany person or institution can still make contribution to the NDRF.[Para 61][464-F-H; 465-A]

3.5 Secondly, the PM CARES Fund has been constitutedin the year 2020 after outbreak of pandemic COVID-19 whereasthe new guidelines came into force with effect from 2015-16, onEwhich date the PM CARES Fund was not in existence, hence,the submission that new guidelines were amended to benefit thePM CARES Fund is wholly misconceived. [Para 62][465-B]

3.6 After issuance of the notification, the Government ofIndia, Ministry of Home Affairs (Disaster Management Division)Fissued order of 03.04.2020 on the subject: “Advance release ofCentral share from State Disaster Risk Management Fund(SDRMF) for the year 2020-21”. By the said order the CentralGovernment has released first instalment of Rs. 11,092/- croresout of Rs.22,184/- crores which was the Central Share of SDRMF.GAll States have been allocated different amounts for the purposeof providing assistance under SDRMF. Annexure to the saidnotification is at page 161, which indicates that maximum grantallocated was to the State of Maharashtra as Rs.1,611/- crores asfirst instalment and minimum amount to State of Goa, i.e., H

Rs.6/- crores by the Centre. The notification dated 14.03.2020clearly permits providing the assistance under SDRMF forCOVID-19. In event, any State expenditure is in excess of thebalance in the State’s SDRMF, the State is entitled for the releaseof fund from NDRF as it is clear from new guidelines filed. Thesubmission of the petitioner that NDRF cannot be used for anyassistance for COVID-19, thus, cannot be accepted. There is onemore aspect of the matter which needs to be noted. When theCentre is providing financial assistance to the State to takemeasures to contain COVID-19, as this Court has noticed abovethat by order dated 03.04.2020 first instalment of Rs. 11,092/-crores which is the Central Share to the SDRMF has been givenand there is nothing on record that any State has exceeded theexpenditure in excess of the balance in the State’s SDRMF, thereis no occasion of asking more fund by the State from NDRF. Whenthe Central Government is providing financial assistance to theStates to contain COVID-19 it is not for any PIL petitioner to saythat Centre should give amount from this fund or that fund. Thefinancial planning is in the domain of the Central Government,which financial planning is made after due deliberation andconsideration. This Court thus, does not find any substance inthe submission of the petitioner that there is any statutoryrestriction/prohibition in utilization of NDRF for COVID-19. Moreso when sub-section (2) of Section 46 specifically provides thatNDRF shall be made available to the National ExecutiveCommittee to be applied towards meeting the expenses foremergency response, relief and rehabilitation in accordance withthe guidelines laid down by the Central Government, the NDRFcan be used for containment of COVID-19. [Paras 64 and 65][466-F-H; 467-A-E]

3.7 The guidelines which were issued for constitution andadministration of NDRF and State’s SDRMF, the guidelinesprovided utilization of fund for limited calamities, which did notinclude any biological and public health emergency. This Courthas already noticed Clause 3.1 of guidelines for administration ofNDRF, which did not provide for the calamities which cover thebiological and public health emergency. Thus, under the guidelineswhich were in existence with effect from financial year 2015-16neither NDRF nor SDRF covered the biological and public health ABC

D

EF

G

H

ABC

D

EF

G

H

Aemergencies. It was only by notification dated 14.03.2020 thatCOVID-19 was treated as notified disaster for the purpose ofproviding assistance under SDRF. Obviously prior to thisnotification dated 14.03.2020 no contribution by any person orinstitution in the NDRF could have been made with respect tospecified disaster, namely, biological and public health emergencyBlike COVID-19, Outbreak of COVID-19 in India as well as othercountries of the World required immediate enhancement in theinfrastructure of medical health and creation of fund to containCOVID-19. At this need of the hour no exception can be takento the constitution of a public charitable trust, namely, PMCCARES Fund to have necessary financial resources to meet theemergent situation. [Para 71][468-F-H; 469-A-B]

3.8 The NDRF and PM CARES Fund are two entirelydifferent funds with different object and purpose. In view of theforegoing discussions, the question Nos.3, 4 and 5 are answeredDin following manner:

Answer 3. The Union of India can very well utilize the NDRFfor providing assistance in the fight of COVID-19 pandemic byway of releasing fund on the request of the States as per newguidelines.

Answer 4. Any contribution, grant of any individual orEinstitution is not prohibited to be credited into the NDRF and itis still open for any person or institution to make contribution tothe NDRF in terms of Section 46(1)(b) of the Act, 2005. Thecontribution by any person or by any institution in PM CARESFund is voluntary and it is open for any person or institution toFmake contribution to the PM CARES Fund.

Answer 5. The funds collected in the PM CARES Fund areentirely different funds which are funds of a public charitable trustand there is no occasion for issuing any direction to transfer thesaid funds to the NDRF. [Para 72][469-C-F]GSwaraj Abhiyan v. Union of India & Ors., (2016) 7SCC 498 – referred to.

Gaurav Kumar Bansal v. Union of India and Ors.,(2017) 6 SCC 730; Mulla Gulam Ali & Safiabai D. Trustv. Deelip Kumar & Co., (2003) 11 SCC 772 – reliedHon.

Case Law Reference

(2016) 7 SCC 498referred toPara 8(2017) 6 SCC 730relied onPara 8(2003) 11 SCC 772relied onPara 68

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No.546 of 2020.

[Under Article 32 of The Constitution of India]

Tushar Mehta, SG, K.M. Nataraj, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, SanjayJain, ASGs, Amit Kumar, AG, (Meghalaya), Anil Grover, AAG, (Haryana),Jayant Muthuraj, AAG, (Tamil Nadu), Tapesh Kumar Singh, AAG,(Jharkhand), Saurabh Mishra, AAG, (M.P.), Colin Gonsalves, C.P.Sudhakara Prasad, Dushyant Dave, Ranjit Kumar, Dr. Manish Singhvi,Kapil Sibal, P. Chidambaram, Ms. Gayatri Singh, Gopal Sankarnarayan,Jaideep Gutpa, Sr. Advs., Nikhil Goel, Naveen Goel, Dushyant Sarna,Vinay Mathew, Abhimanue Shrestha, Arun Pedneker, Rahul Chitnis, SachinPatil, Rajat Nair, Kanu Agrawal, Saurab Mishra, Gurmeet Singh Makker,B. V. Balaram Das, Ejaz Maqbool, Ms. Uttara Babbar, M. Shoeb Alam,S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Ms. Swati Bhardeaj, Ms. Gunjan Singh, SiddharthSeem, Ms. Anupradha Singh, Satya Mitra, Jishnu M.L., Ms. PriyankaPrakash, Ms. Beena Prakash, G. Prakash, Prashant Bhushan,Dr. Abhishek Atrey, Shadman Ali, Ms. Vidyottma Jha, Ms. Ambika Atrey,Chirag M. Shroff, Ms. Sanjana Nangia, Ms. Abhilasha Bharati, AvijitMani Tripathi, Abhikalp P. Singh, Shaurya Sahay, Ms. Tarini K. Nayak,Abhimanue Shrestha, Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, Sumeer Sodhi, AshishTiwari, Ms. Noopur Singhal, Rahul Khurana, Sanjay Kumar Visen,Pranav Sachdeva, Manish Kumar, Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar,Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Karun Sharma, Shresth Sharma, SuhaanMukerji, Vishal Prasad, Amit Verma, M/S. Plr Chambers And Co.,Raghvendra Kumar, Narendra Kumar, V. G. Pragasam, S. PrabuRamasubramanian, Karan Bharihoke, Siddhant Sharma, ShubhranshuPadhi, Abhimanyu Tewari, Biju P. Raman, Raj Bahadur Yadav, Ms. ShashiJuneja, Ms. Pinky Behera, Abhinav Mukerji, Ms. Bihu Sharma,Ms. Pratishtha Vij, Mohit Paul, Rushab Aggarwal, Ms. Sunaina Phul,K.V. Jagdishvaran, Ms. G. Indira, M. Yogesh Kanna, Shuvodeep Roy,Rituraj Biswas, Sibo Sankar Mishra, Sandeep Kumar Jha, Ms. K. EnatoliSema, Siddhesh Kotwal, Ms. Arshiya Ghose, Ms. Astha Sharma, ArjunGarg, Ms. Rati Tandon, Deepak Prakash, Nachiketa Vajpayee, A

B

C

D

EF

GH

AMs. Divyangna Malik, Ms. Rashmi Bansal, Raj Kishor Choudhary,Ms. Nupur Kumar, Ms. Ronita Bhattacharya, Shadan Farasat, BharatGupta, Sunil Fernandes, Amit Bhandari, Muhammad Khan, AvishkarSinghvi, Varun Chopra, Omar Hoda, Prastut Dalvi, Ms. AishwaryaMohapatra, Gurtejpal Singh, Ms. Mithu Jain, Arnav Vidyarthi, VivekSharma, Nitin Mishra, Ms. Mitali Gupta, Advs. for the appearing parties.BAlakh Alok Srivastava, Ms. Nanita Sharma, Mukesh Kumar,applicant-in-persons.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.C

1. From the beginning of this year, 2020, the world including ourcountry is in the grip of a pandemic known as Novel Coronavirus(COVID-19). On 31.12.2019, a cluster of cases of pneumonia of unknowncause in the city of Wuhan, Hubei Province in China was reported to theWorld Health Organisation (WHO). This was subsequently identified asDa new virus in January, 2020 and over the following months, the numberof cases continued to rise but were not contained to China and showedexponential growth worldwide. Due to the global rise in cases, this wasdeclared a pandemic on 11.03.2020 by the WHO. The number of affectedpersons is increasing worldwide. Although, substantial population is alsoErecovering from it but India witnessed exponential growth in number ofcases in the last month.

2. The world is familiar with several kinds of disasters from timeimmemorial. Every country has faced one or other disaster in recentmemory. Disasters disturb lives, societies and livelihood around the world.FThe impact of disaster is to strike hard earned economy, developmentand material gains. Many of the destructive hazards are natural in originand some man made also. The whole world having faced adverse effectof different kinds of disasters is now well aware of its ill effect and stepsinternationally as well as nationally are being taken for last severaldecades to combat different kinds of disasters. U.N. General AssemblyGrecognizing the importance of reducing the impact of natural disaster forall people including developing countries designated 1990 as theinternational decade of natural disaster reduction. The InternationalStrategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) was established followingIDNDR of the 1990s. The UN/GA convened the second WorldConference on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) in Kobe, Hyogo, JapanH

2005, which concluded the review of the Yokohama Strategy and itsPlan of Action and the adoption of the Hyogo Framework for Action2005–2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities toDisasters (HFA) (UNISDR 2005) by 168 countries. The HFA outlinedfive priorities for action:

A

“(1)Ensure that DRR is a national and a local priority with aBstrong institutional basis for implementation;

(2) Identify, assess, and monitor disaster risks and enhance earlywarning;

(3) Use knowledge, innovation, and education to build a cultureCof safety and resilience at all levels;

(4) Reduce the underlying risk factors;

(5) Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response atall levels.”

D

3. On 23.12.2005, both the Houses of Indian Parliament passed aDisaster Management Bill. The Introduction and the Statement of Objectsand Reasons of the Bill mentions: - “INTRODUCTION

For prevention and mitigation effects of disasters and forundertaking a holistic, coordinated and prompt response to anydisaster situation it has been decided by the Government to enacta law on disaster management to provide for requisite institutionalmechanisms for drawing up and monitoring the implementation ofthe disaster management plans, ensuring measures by variouswings of Government. To achieve this objective the DisasterManagement Bill was introduced in the Parliament.

E

F

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS

The Government have decided to enact a law on disastermanagement to provide for requisite institutional mechanisms fordrawing up and monitoring the implementation of the disastermanagement plans, ensuring measures by various wings ofGovernment for prevention and mitigating effects of disasters andfor undertaking a holistic, coordinated and prompt response toany disaster situation.”

G

H

A

A4. The Disaster Management Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred toas “Act, 2005”) was enacted to provide for the effective managementof disasters and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. Theenactment of Disaster Management Act, 2005 was to bring in placerequisite institutional mechanisms for drawing up and monitoring theimplementation of the Disaster Management Plans and other measuresBby various wings of the Government for preventing and mitigating effectsof disasters. We shall notice the relevant provisions of the Act a littlelater.

5. In accord with Disaster Management Act, 2005, Union Cabinetapproved a “National Policy on Disaster Management, 2009”. ParagraphC1.1.1, 1.2.1 and 1.3.1 of the policy reads as under: -

“1.1.1 Disasters disrupt progress and destroy the hard-earnedfruits of painstaking developmental efforts, often pushing nations,in quest for progress, back by several decades. Thus, efficientmanagement of disasters, rather than mere response to theirDoccurrence, has in recent times, received increased attention bothwithin India and abroad. This is as much a result of the recognitionof the increasing frequency and intensity of disasters, as it is anacknowledgement that good governance in a caring and civilisedsociety, needs to deal effectively with the devastating impact ofEdisasters.

1.2.1 India is vulnerable, in varying degrees, to a large number ofnatural as well as man-made disasters. 58.6 per cent of thelandmass is prone to earthquakes of moderate to very highintensity; over 40 million hectares (12 per cent of land) is prone toFfloods and river erosion; of the 7,516 km long coastline, close to5,700 km is prone to cyclones and tsunamis; 68 per cent of thecultivable area is vulnerable to drought and hilly areas are at riskfrom landslides and avalanches. Vulnerability to disasters/emergencies of Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear(CBRN) origin also exists. Heightened vulnerabilities to disasterGrisks can be related to expanding population, urbanisation andindustrialisation, development within high-risk zones, environmentaldegradation and climate change (Maps 1–4).

1.3.1 On 23 December 2005, the Government of India (GoI) tooka defining step by enacting the Disaster Management Act, 2005, H

(hereinafter referred to as the Act) which envisaged the creationof the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), headedby the Prime Minister, State Disaster Management Authorities(SDMAs) headed by the Chief Ministers, and District DisasterManagement Authorities (DDMAs) headed by the DistrictCollector or District Magistrate or Deputy Commissioner as thecase may be, to spearhead and adopt a holistic and integratedapproach to DM. There will be a paradigm shift, from the erstwhilerelief-centric response to a proactive prevention, mitigation andpreparedness-driven approach for conserving developmental gainsand to minimise loss of life, livelihood and property.”

The policy noticed institutional framework under the Act, dealtwith financial arrangement, disaster prevention, mitigation andpreparedness.

6. Third U.N. World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction washeld in March, 2015 at Sendai, Japan. One of the declarations made inthe conference was: - “We, the Heads of State and Government, ministers and delegatesparticipating in the Third United Nations World Conference onDisaster Risk Reduction, have gathered from 14 to 18 March2015 in Sendai City of Miyagi Prefecture in Japan, which hasdemonstrated a vibrant recovery from the Great East JapanEarthquake in March 2011. Recognizing the increasing impact ofdisasters and their complexity in many parts of the world, wedeclare our determination to enhance our efforts to strengthendisaster risk reduction to reduce disaster losses of lives and assetsfrom disasters worldwide.”

7. The Sendai declaration dealing with priorities for actionemphasized following in paragraph 33(a):- “33(a) To prepare or review and periodically update disasterpreparedness and contingency policies, plans andprogrammes with the involvement of the relevantinstitutions, considering climate change scenarios and theirimpact on disaster risk, and facilitating, as appropriate,the participation of all sectors and relevant stakeholders;”

8. Although Section 11 of Act, 2005 contemplated preparation ofa National Plan, however, the National Plan was not prepared till the AB

C

D

E

F

G

H

Ayear 2016 as was noticed by this Court in a judgment of this Court inSwaraj Abhiyan Vs. Union of India & Ors., (2016) 7 SCC 498. Inthe year 2016, National Disaster Management Plan was prepared asrequired by Section 11 of the Act, 2005. The preparation of the NationalPlan under Section 11 was noticed by this Court in Gaurav KumarBansal Vs. Union of India and Ors., (2017) 6 SCC 730. In the sameBjudgment, this Court noticed that State Plan under Section 23 of the Act(except by two States) and District Plan have also been prepared. Thepreparation of National Plan, State Plan and District Plan were noticedin paragraphs 7, 11 and 12 of the above judgment, which are to thefollowing effect:-C“7. It was further pointed out that a National Plan has beenapproved and placed on the website of the NDMA in terms ofSection 11 of the Act and the guidelines for minimum standards ofrelief Under Section 12 of the Act have also been placed on thewebsite of the NDMA.D11. As far as the preparation of the State Plan Under Section 23of the Act is concerned, we have been informed by the learnedCounsel for NDMA that all States except Andhra Pradesh andTelangana have prepared a State Disaster Management Planwhich is very much in place.E12. As far as the districts are concerned, it is stated that the DistrictDisaster Management Authority has been constituted in everydistrict Under Section 25 of the Act and out of 684 districts in thecountry, a District Disaster Management Plan is in place in 615districts while it is under process in the remaining districts.”F9. The revision of the existing National Disaster ManagementPlan, 2016 began in April, 2017 and completed in November, 2019. TheNational Disaster Management Plan approved by National DisasterManagement Authority was notified in November, 2019.

10. This writ petition filed as a public interest litigation has beenGfiled in the wake of Covid-19 pandemic, seeking direction to the Unionof India to prepare, notify and implement a National Plan under Section11 read with Section 10 of the Act, 2005 to deal with current pandemic(Covid-19) and to lay down minimum standards of relief under Section12 of the Act, 2005 to be provided to persons affected with COVID-19.Petitioners have also sought for directions to utilize National DisasterH

Response Fund (NDRF) for the purposes of providing assistance in thefight against COVID-19 and all the contributions/grants from individuals/institutions be credited in NDRF and not to PM CARES Fund and allfunds collected in PM CARES Fund till date should be directed to betransferred to NDRF. It is useful to note the specific prayers (a) to (c)made in the writ petition: - “a.Issue a writ, order or direction to the Union of India toprepare, notify and implement a National Plan under Section11 read with Section 10 of the Disaster Management Act,2005 to deal with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic; b.Issue a writ, order or direction to the Union of India to laydown minimum standards of relief, under Section 12 of theDisaster Management Act, 2005, to be provided to personsaffected by the COVID-19 virus, as well as by the resultantnational lockdown;

c.Issue a writ, order or direction to the Union of India toutilize NDRF for the purpose of providing assistance in thefight against GOVID-19 pandemic in compliance withSection 46 of the DM Act, all the contributions/grants fromindividuals and institutions shall be credited to the NDRF interms of Section 46(1)(b) rather than to PM CARES Fundand all the fund collected in the PM CARES Fund till datemay be directed to be transferred to the NDRF;”

11. We have heard Shri Dushyant Dave, learned senior counselfor the petitioner. Shri Kapil Sibal has also made his submissions in supportof the prayers and issues raised in the writ petition while addressing hissubmissions in Suo Moto Writ Petition No. 6 of 2020. We have alsoheard Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General appearing for theUnion of India.

12. Petitioner’s case in the writ petition is that the National Planuploaded on the website of National Disaster Management Authority ofthe year 2019 does not deal with situations arising out of the currentpandemic and has no mention of measures like lockdown, containmentzones, social distancing etc. The Central Government has notifiedCOVID-19 as a “disaster” under Act, 2005 and has issued series ofnotifications to contain the instant pandemic. Petitioner pleads that Centreneed to prepare a well-drawn National Plan to deal with instant pandemic A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Aand the same need to be prepared after due consultation with the StateGovernment and experts. Petitioner further pleads that Centre shouldcome up with detailed guidelines recommending the minimum standardsof relief to be provided in the relief camps in relation to shelter, food,drinking water, medical cover and sanitation, in absence of which, shelterhomes and relief camps are susceptible of becoming hotbeds for theBspread of COVID-19 infection. Petitioner pleads that Centre should comeup with detailed guidelines under Section 12(ii) and (iii) of the Act, 2005recommending special provisions to be made for widows and orphansand ex gratia to be provided to the kith and kin of those losing life not justbecause of COVID-19 infection but also due to harsh lockdownCrestrictions.

13. The petitioner’s case further is that the grants/contributionsby individuals and institutions should be credited into the National DisasterResponse Fund (NDRF) under Section 46 of the Act, 2005 and NDRFshould be utilized for meeting the ongoing COVID-19 crisis. All theDcontributions made by the individuals and institutions in relation to COVID-19 are being credited into the PM CARES Fund and not in NDRF, whichis clear violation of Section 46 of the Act, 2005. The NDRF is subject toCAG Audit and PM CARES Fund is not subject to CAG Audit.Petitioner’s case further is that the Centre may be directed to utilizeNDRF for the purpose of drawing assistance to fight againstECOVID-19 and all the contributions/grants from individuals and institutionsbe credited to the NDRF in terms of Section 46(1)(b) rather than to PMCARES Fund and all the Fund Collected in the PM CARES Fund tilldate may be directed to be transferred to the NDRF.

14. A preliminary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of theFUnion of India. In the counter affidavit, the respondents have questionedthe locus of the petitioner to file this public interest litigation. Counteraffidavit questions as to whether there can be a permanent body set uponly to file litigation on issues, which the said body subjectively considersto be of “public interest”. Counter affidavit pleads that National DisasterGManagement Plan as per Section 11 is already in place and relevantportion of National Disaster Management Plan – November, 2019 hasbeen annexed as Annexure R-1 to the counter affidavit. Counter affidavitpleads that Act, 2005 provides for a broad framework in terms of theresponse to be provided in pursuance to a National Plan in case of anydisaster. Counter affidavit pleads that National Plan does not and cannotHcontain step by step instructions or specific instructions for the day to day management by Government agencies in the situation of anyparticular and unforeseen disaster. National Plan is not a document thatcontains the microscopic details as to the day to day management of theissues arising out of different disasters. National Disaster ManagementAuthority has issued various orders from time to time to take effectivemeasures found required at the relevant point of time to contain thespread of COVID-19 in the country. The Chairperson of NationalExecutive Committee has issued several guidelines from time to time.National Disaster Management Authority has, in order to createpreparedness with regard to any contingent biological disaster, has framedthe “National Disaster Management Guidelines Management of BiologicalDisasters”. National Disaster Management Authority has framed broadtemplate for State level and District level for contingency plan for COVID-19. The Nodal Ministry, i.e., Ministry of Health and Family Welfare hasissued a “Cluster Containment Plan for COVID-19” on 02.03.2020, whichwas further updated on 16.05.2020. Further instructions have been issuedfrom time to time including the guidance documents. The Ministry ofHealth and Family Welfare has approved the India COVID-19Emergency Response and Health Systems Preparedness Package ofRs.15000 crores, which seeks to support States/Union Territories invarious aspects of management of the COVID Pandemic and providessupport for establishment of COVID dedicated facilities for treatmentof COVID-19 cases including for critical care, enhancement in testingcapacities, engagement and training of necessary human resources andprocurement of essential equipment and protective gear for the healthcare personnel engaged in COVID-19 duties etc. With regard to minimumstandards of relief, the counter affidavit refers and relies on guidelineson Minimum Standards of Relief under Section 12, which has been broughton record as Annexure R-7. The Counter affidavit also outlines varioussteps taken by Health Ministry as well as the Government of India.

15. Replying the averments in the writ petition regarding PMCARES Fund and NDRF, the counter affidavit pleads that there areseveral funds which are either established earlier or now for carryingout various relief works. PM CARES Fund is one of such funds withvoluntary donations. Affidavit further states that there exist a NDRFwhich would not prohibit creation of a different fund like PM CARESfund which provides for voluntary donations. The directions prayed inthe writ petition for transfer of funds received in PM CARES Fund inthe NDRF are non-maintainable.

AB

C

D

EF

G

H

AB

C

D

EF

G

H

A16. Shri Dushyant Dave, learned senior counsel appearing for thepetitioner referring to the pleadings of the petitioner made in the writpetition contends that Centre was obliged to prepare a National Plan forDisaster Management specifically for COVID-19. Shri Dave does notdispute that National Plan under Section 11 has been framed inNovember, 2019 but he submits that said Plan is neither comprehensiveBnor covers management of pandemic, i.e., COVID-19. Shri Dave submitsthat power given in a Statute is to be exercised in the same manner. ShriDave further submits that there is a serious problem in implementing theNational Plan, 2019. Shri Dave has taken us to certain portion of Plan ofNovember, 2019, which has been filed as Annexure – P-2 to the writCpetition. Shri Dave submits that only paragraph 7.15 deals with biologicaland public health emergencies but Plan does not contemplate giving anyfinancial relief. Shri Dave submits that unless there is a National Planfor COVID-19, effective measures cannot be taken to containCOVID-19. Referring to Section 46 of the Act, 2005, Shri Dave submitsthat NDRF having been constituted by Central Government, all amountDgiven by individuals and organisations for disaster should have beencredited in NDRF. He submits that PM CARES Fund should not havebeen constituted when NDRF is already in place to take care of disasters.Shri Dave submits that there is no provision in 2019 Plan to give fund toNDRF. Referring to Operational Guidelines for Constitution andEAdministration of the National Disaster Response Fund at page 129 ofthe writ petition, Shri Dave submits that paragraph 5.5 provides thatcontribution made by the persons or institutions for the purpose of disastermanagement to be credited in the NDRF, which clause 5.5 has beenomitted in the subsequent Operational Guidelines for Constitution andAdministration of the National Disaster Response Fund filed at pageF154, which is recent guidelines. By deletion of clause 5.5 now contributionby any person or institution for the purpose of disaster management tothe NDRF is not permissible. Shri Dave submits that petitioners have noreason to doubt the bonafide of PM CARES Fund but by creating PMCARES Fund the NDRF is being circumvented. What cannot be doneGdirectly cannot be done indirectly. Although, NDRF is audited by CAG,the PM CARES Fund is audited by only private auditors.

17. Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General refuting thesubmissions of the counsel for the petitioners submits that reliefs (i) and(ii) made in the writ petition has become infructuous since National PlanHhas already been prepared under Section 11, which has been referred to in the counter affidavit and relevant extract of the Plan has already beenbrought on record as Annexure R-1 along with counter affidavit. Hesubmits that insofar as the guidelines for minimum standards of reliefsare concerned, there are guidelines in existence, which has been broughton record by the counter affidavit, which covers all disasters includingCOVID-19. Shri Mehta submits that Plan – November, 2019 along withthe powers given in the Act, 2005 contains several measures to containthe spread of COVID-19 and no separate National Plan is required forCOVID-19.

18. Shri Tushar Mehta submits that a National Disaster ResponseFund has been created as stipulated under Section 46 of Act, 2005, whichconsist of fund in the form of budgetary provisions made by the CentralGovernment in National Disaster Response Fund. He submits that theexistence of National Disaster Response Fund, which is a statutory fund,neither prevents creation of any public charitable trust receiving voluntarydonation nor can remotely mean that the amount received in all suchvoluntary funds should go in the statutory fund created under Section46. National Disaster Response Fund and PM CARES Fund being distinctand separate, there is no occasion for any direction to transfer the amountof PM CARES Fund to the National Disaster Response Fund.

19. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusedthe record. Applications for intervention are rejected.

20. The respondent in its affidavit has raised contention/objectionregarding the locus standi of the petitioner. It is, inter alia, contendedthat there cannot be a permanent body existing only for filing publicinterest litigations. Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General, however,pointed out that at the outset, in the facts of the present case, he wouldrather like to assist the Hon’ble court on merits and requested that thequestion of locus standi of the petitioner which, according to him is avery serious question, be left open to be raised and decided in otherproceedings. We have, therefore, heard the parties on merits, keepingthe aforesaid question open, to be heard and decided in an appropriateproceeding.

21. From the submissions of the learned counsel for the partiesand the pleadings on record, following questions arise for considerationin this writ petition: - A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

AI)Whether the Union of India under Section 11 of Act, 2005,is obliged to prepare, notify and implement a NationalDisaster Management Plan specifically for pandemicCOVID-19 irrespective of National Disaster ManagementPlan notified in November, 2019?

BII)Whether the Union of India is obliged to lay down theminimum standards of relief under Section 12 of Act, 2005,for COVID-19 irrespective of earlier guidelines issued underSection 12 of the Act, 2005 laying down the minimumstandards of relief?

CIII)Whether Union of India is obliged to utilise National DisasterResponse Fund created under Section 46 of the Act for thepurpose of providing assistance in the fight of COVID-19?

IV)Whether all the contributions/grants from individuals andinstitutions should be credited to the NDRF in terms ofDSection 46(1)(b) of the Act rather than to PM CARESFund?

V)Whether all the funds collected in the PM CARES Fund tilldate be directed to be transferred to the NDRF?

QUESTION NO.I

E

I)Whether the Union of India under Section 11 of Act,2005, is obliged to prepare, notify and implement aNational Disaster Management Plan specifically forpandemic COVID-19 irrespective of National DisasterManagement Plan notified in November, 2019?F

22. The Act, 2005, has been enacted for the effective managementof Disasters and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.Section 3 of the Act constitutes National Disaster Management Authoritywith the Prime Minister of India as the Chairperson, ex-officio. Section6 enumerates the powers and functions of National Authority. As perGSection 6 sub-Section (2)(b), National Disaster Management Authority(hereinafter referred to as National Authority) is to approve the NationalPlan. Under Section 7, the National Authority may constitute an advisoryCommittee consisting of experts in the field of Disaster Management tomake recommendations on different aspects of Disaster Management.Under Section 8, the Central Government is to constitute a NationalH

Executive Committee to assist the National Authority in the performanceof its functions under the Act. Section 11 of the Act deals with NationalPlan, which provision is to the following effect: - “11. National Plan –(1) There shall be drawn up a planfor disaster management for the whole of the country to be calledthe National Plan.

(2) The National Plan shall be prepared by the NationalExecutive Committee having regard to the National Policy and inconsultation with the State Governments and expert bodies ororganizations in the field of disaster management to be approvedby the National Authority.

(3) The National Plan shall include –

(a) measures to be taken for the prevention ofdisasters, or the mitigation of their effects; (b) measures to be taken for the integration ofmitigation measures in the development plans;

(c) measures to be taken for preparedness andcapacity building to effectively respond to anythreatening disaster situations or disaster; (d) roles and responsibilities of different Ministriesor Departments of the Government of India inrespect of measures specified in clauses (a), (b) and(c).

(4) The National Plan shall be reviewed and updatedannually.

(5) Appropriate provisions shall be made by the CentralGovernment for financing the measures to be carried out underthe National Plan.

(6) Copies of the National Plan referred to in sub-sections(2) and (4) shall be made available to the Ministries or Departmentsof the Government of India and such Ministries or Departmentsshall draw up their own plans in accordance with National Plan.”

23. As noted above, the first National Plan under Section 11 wasframed in the year 2016, which was revised and the National Plan wasprepared and notified in November, 2019. Extract of National Disaster A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

AManagement Plan of November, 2019 has been brought on record bothby the petitioner as Annexure-P2 to the writ petition as well as by therespondent as Annexure-R1 to the preliminary counter affidavit.

24. We may notice certain relevant portions of the Plan, 2019 toanswer the question which is up for consideration. The Plan, 2019 underBheading ‘Executive Summary’ states: - “...The National Disaster Management Plan (NDMP)provides a framework and direction to the government agenciesfor all phases of disaster management cycle. The NDMP is a“dynamic document” in the sense that it will be periodicallyCimproved keeping up with the emerging global best practices andknowledge base in disaster management. It is in accordance withthe provisions of the DM Act, 2005, the guidance given in theNational Policy on Disaster Management (NPDM) 2009, and theestablished national practices...”

D25. In the Executive summary itself, while noticing the changesintroduced, the Plan states that new sections have been added relatingto several hazards including “Biological and Public Health Emergencies”.The Plan, 2019 provides a framework and directions to the GovernmentAgencies for all phases of Disaster Management. The Plan is a dynamicdocument in the sense that it was to be periodically improved, keepingEup with the best practices and knowledge based in Disaster Management.The Plan provides a framework covering all aspects of DisasterManagement. It covers Disaster Risk Reduction, mitigation, preparedness,response, recovery and building back better. It recognizes that effectiveDisaster Management necessitates a comprehensive frameworkFencompassing multiple hazards. Paragraph 1.4 of the Plan under theheading ‘Legal Mandate’ states: - “1.4. Legal Mandate Section 11 of the DM Act 2005 mandates that there shallbe a National Disaster Management Plan (NDMP) for the wholeGof India. The NDMP complies with the National Policy on DisasterManagement (NPDM) of 2009 and conforms to the provisions ofthe DM Act making it mandatory for the various central ministriesand departments to have adequate DM plans. While the NDMPwill pertain to the disaster management for the whole of the country, H

the hazard-specific nodal ministries and departments notified bythe Government of India will prepare detailed DM plans specificto the disaster assigned. As per Section 37 of the DM Act, everyministry and department of the Government of India, be it hazard-specific nodal ministries or not, shall prepare comprehensive DMplans detailing how each of them will contribute to the nationalefforts in the domains of disaster prevention, preparedness,response, and recovery.

As per the mandate of the DM Act, the NDMP assignsspecific and general responsibilities to all ministries anddepartments for disaster management. The DM Act enjoins theNDMP to assign necessary responsibilities to various ministriesto support and implement the plan. Therefore, it is incumbent onall ministries to accept all the implicit and explicit responsibilitiesmentioned in the NDMP even if they are beyond what are explicitlymentioned in the normal rules of business. Disaster managementrequires assumption of responsibilities beyond the normalfunctioning. The NDMP will be complemented by separatecontingency plans, SOPs, manuals, and guidelines at all levels ofthe multi-tiered governance system.”

26. The above part of the Plan categorically states that the Planwill be complemented by several contingency plans, Standard OperatingProcedures (SOPs), Manuals and Guidelines at all levels of the multi-tiered governance system. Paragraph 1.13 deals with ‘types of Disasters’.Paragraph 1.13.1, ‘Natural Hazards’ have been enumerated in five majorcategories. Sub-category (5) is to the following effect:- “1.13.1 Natural Hazards

1)...

5) Biological Process or phenomenon or organic origin orconveyed by biological vectors, including exposure to pathogenicmicro-organisms, toxins and bioactive substances that may causeloss of life, injury, illness or other health impacts, property damage,loss of livelihoods and services, social and economic disruption orenvironmental damage.”

27. Under Table 1-1, ‘Categories of Natural Hazards’ have beendetailed. Item (5) of the Table 1-1 is to the following effect: - AB

C

D

E

F

G

H

A“Table 1-1: Categories of Natural HazardsFamily Main Event Short Description/ Secondary Disaster 1Geophysical 2Hydrological B3Meteorological4Climatological5 Biological Exposure to Epidemics: germs and toxic Viral, bacterial substances parasitic, fungal, Cor prion infections Insect infestations Animal stampedesD

28. Table 1-3, provides for ‘Nodal Ministry for Management/Mitigation of Different Disasters’ with regard to Biological Emergencies,Nodal Ministry is notified as Ministry of Health and Family Welfare(MoHFW). Under paragraph 2.2.3.3, Biological and Public HealthEEmergencies have been dealt with. The First paragraph of the above isas follows:-

“...Disasters related to this sub-group are biologicalemergencies and epidemics, pest attacks, cattle epidemics andfood poisoning. Biological emergency is one caused due to naturaloutbreaks of epidemics or intentional use of biological agentsF(viruses and microorganisms) or toxins through dissemination ofsuch agents in ways to harm human population, food crops andlivestock to cause outbreaks of diseases. This may happen throughnatural, accidental, or deliberate dispersal of such harmful agentsinto food, water, air, soil or into plants, crops, or livestock. ApartGfrom the natural transnational movement of the pathogenicorganisms, their potential use as weapons of biological warfareand bioterrorism has become far more important now than everbefore. Along with nuclear and chemical agents, many biologicalagents are now considered as capable of causing large-scalemortality and morbidity...”

H

29. Paragraphs 6 and 7 deals with “Building Disaster Resilience -Responsibility Framework, Part A and B”. Dealing with Biological andPublic Health Emergencies in paragraph 7.15, following are the sub-heads under the paragraph: - “7.15 Biological and Public Health Emergencies (BPHE)

7.15.1 Understanding Risk

7.15.2 Inter-Agency Coordination

7.15.3 Investing in DRR–Structural Measures 7.15.4 Investing in DRR- Non-structural Measures 7.15.5 Capacity Development 7.15.6 Climate Change Risk Management”

30. A detailed chart has been prepared under paragraph 7.15 infive parts and it shall be useful to notice the only first portion of paragraph 7.15.1, item 1, which is to the following effect: - “7.15.1 Understanding Risk A

B

C

D

B iolo gic a l & P u b lic H e a lth E m e r gen c ies (B PH E )

H

452SUPREME COURT REPORTS[2020] 11 S.C.R.A31. The other items apart from item (1) as noticed above inparagraph 7, which are relevant is as follows:-Biological & Public Health Emergencies (BPHE) Sub-Thematic Central/State Agencies and their ResponsibilitiesArea for DRR Centre[#]Responsibility - CentreState[#]Responsibility -StateB2.Hazard Risk MHFW[*], Recurring/ HFWD, Recurring/ Regular Vulnerability and MAFW[*], MHA, Regular (RR)DMD[$], (RR)Capacity MOD, MOES, • Promote studies, SDMA, Updating HRVCA Assessment MOEFCC, documentation and DRD, (HRVCA)MSJE, NDMAresearch UDD, Identifying the DWSD, vulnerable • Provide Training & EFD, population/ Technical support AHD, communities/ WCD, settlements C• Studies on vulnerabilities and capacities DSJE, PRI, Identification of covering social, ULB, groups requiring physical, economic, SLRTI, special attention ecological, gender, DDMAsocial inclusion and Conduct audit of equity aspectsequipment and hu man resource Short-Term (T1)requirements DDevelop guidelines Short term(T1)Constitute/ strengthen the mechanisms for consultation with experts and stakeholders3 Dissemination of MHFW, MHA, Recurring/ Regular HFWD[*], Short Term (T1)warnings, data & MOD, MOES, (RR)DMD[$], Create awareness information MAFW, Support for organising SDMA, preventive measures MOEFCC, training DRD, NDMA UDD, Extensive IEC E Extend technical DWSD, campaigns to create support EDD, awareness through PD, EFD, print, electronic and AHD, social media WCD, PRI, Medium Term (T2)ULB, Specific messages for SLRTI, highly vulnerable groups DDMA such as elderly, young children, outdoor Fworkers and slum residents4 Disaster Data MHA[*] , MOSPI, Recurring/ DMD[$], Recurring/ Regular Collection and all ministries/ Regular (RR) SDMA, (RR)Management depts. Systematic data all depts. Systematic data management of data on management of data on disaster damage and loss disaster damage and loss assessments assessments GDisaster Short Term (T1)Damage and Disaster Damage and Short Term (T1)Losses 2005-2015 baseline Losses 2005- 2015 baseline Notes: (#) Every ministry, department or agency of the government– central and state – not specifically mentioned will also haveboth direct and indirect supporting role depending on the disaster,Hlocation and context. (*) The ministry, department or agency with this symbol has or is deemed to have a nodal or lead role, whileothers mentioned have a direct or explicit supporting role. ($) DMD—Disaster Management Department: The state governmentdepartment acting as the nodal department for disastermanagement, which is not the same in every state/UT.

32. Paragraph 7.15.2 deals with inter-agency coordination in theseitems. Paragraph 7.15.3 deals with investing in DRR – Structuralmeasures. Paragraph 7.15.4 deals with investing in DRR – Non-structural measures. Paragraph 7.15.5 deals with capacity development.Paragraph 7.15.6 deals with climate change risk management. The plan,thus, contains detailed treatment of Biological and Public HealthEmergencies as noticed above, which have been detailed at pages 117to 130 of the Annexure-R1 of the counter affidavit. All aspects ofBiological and Public Health Emergencies have been, thus, dealt insystematic and planned manner. The Plan of 2019 in different paragraphsdeals with entire framework.

33. The submission which has been pressed by petitioner is thatdespite existence of Plan, 2019, there has to be specific Plan dealingwith COVID-19, hence, Union of India may be directed to prepare aNational Plan under Section 11 for COVID-19. Section 11 of the Actprovides that there shall be a plan for Disaster Management for thewhole of the Country. Sub-Section (3) of Section 11 requires that theNational Plan shall include: - “11.(3) The National Plan shall include- (a) measures to be taken for the prevention of disasters, or themitigation of their effects; (b) measures to be taken for the integration of mitigation measuresin the development plans;

(c) measures to be taken for preparedness and capacity buildingto effectively respond to any threatening disaster situations ordisaster; (d) roles and responsibilities of different Ministries or Departmentsof the Government of India in respect of measures specifiedin clauses (a), (b) and (c). “

34. The object and purpose of preparing a National Plan is tocope up and tackle with all conceivable disasters which the country may A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Aface. When the measures have to be taken for preparedness and capacitybuilding to effectively respond to any threatening disaster situation, thesection does not contemplate preparation of Plan after a disaster hasoccurred.

35. National Plan and guidelines as contemplated by the statuteBfor Disaster Management is by its very nature prior to the occurrence ofany disaster and as a measure of preparedness. It is not conceivablethat a National Plan would be framed after the disaster has occurred. ANational Plan encompasses and contemplate all kinds of disasters.

36. As noticed above, Biological and Public Health EmergenciesChas already been contemplated in the National Plan, 2019, which asnoticed in table 1-1 under paragraph 1.13.1 specifically includesepidemics: Viral, Bacterial, Parasitic, Fungal and prion infections. NovelCoronavirus is an epidemic which has become a pandemic.Epidemics of different nature and extent have taken place in this countryas well as other countries of the world. A pandemic is an epidemic, i.e.,Dspread over multiple countries/ continents. An epidemic, as a disasterhas been known and recognized throughout the world with which mostof the countries are infected time and again. As noticed above, Plan-2019 is complemented by several plans, Standard Operating Procedures(SOPs), Manuals, Guidelines at all levels of the Government.

E37. The National Disaster Management Authority, Governmentof India, had issued National Disaster Management Guidelines in July,2008 on subject “Management of Biological Disasters”. The guidelinespecifically notices that “Biological Disasters” might be caused byepidemics, the guidelines states:-F“Biological disasters might be caused by epidemics, accidentalrelease of virulent microorganism(s) or Bioterrorism (BT) withthe use of biological agents such as anthrax, smallpox, etc. Theexistence of infectious diseases has been known among humancommunities and civilisations since the dawn of the history. TheGClassical literature of nearly all civilisations record the ability ofmajor infections to decimate populations, thwart military campaignsand unsettle nations. Social upheavals caused by epidemics havecontributed in shaping history over the ages...”

38. Thus, the National Disaster Management Authority was wellaware of the epidemics and had issued guidelines in the year 2008 itselfH

which has been further detailed in Plan-2019. All aspects of the epidemics,all measures to contain an epidemic, preparedness, response, mitigationhave been elaborately dealt in Plan, 2019. Unless the National Plan ascontemplated under Section 11 contains all aspects of disaster includingthe Biological and Public Health Emergencies, it will not be possible forthe Governments to immediately respond and contain an epidemic.

39. The Disaster Management Act, 2005 contain ample powersand measures, which can be taken by the National Disaster ManagementAuthority, National Executive Committee and Central Government toprepare further plans, guidelines and Standard Operating Procedure(SOPs), which in respect to COVID-19 have been done from time totime. Containment Plan for Novel Coronavirus, 2019 has been issued byMinistry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, copy ofwhich updated up to 16.05.2020 has been brought on record as Annexure-R4. There are no lack of guidelines, SOPs and Plan to containCOVID-19, by Nodal Ministry and Annexure R-6 has been brought onrecord issued by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government ofIndia, i.e., Updated Containment Plan for Large Outbreaks NovelCoronavirus Disease, 2019 (COVID-19).

40. National Executive Committee as well as Nodal Ministry hasissued guidelines and orders from time to time to regulate all measuresto contain COVID-19. The petitioners are not right in their submissionsthat there is no sufficient plan to deal with COVID-19 pandemic.COVID-19 being a Biological and Public Health Emergency, which hasbeen specifically covered by National Plan, 2019, which is supplementedby various plans, guidelines and measures, there is no lack or dearth ofplans and procedures to deal with COVID-19.

41. We may also notice that this Court in Gaurav Kumar BansalVs. Union of India and Others, (2017) 6 SCC 730, has noticed thatNational Plan under Section 11 has already been approved by NationalDisaster Management Authority. In paragraph 7 of the judgment, followingwas laid down: - “7. It was further pointed out that a National plan has beenapproved and placed on the website of NDMA in terms of Section11 of the Act and the guidelines for minimum standards of reliefunder Section 12 of the Act have also been placed on the websiteof NDMA.”

AB

C

D

E

F

G

H

A

A42. In view of above discussion, we do not find any merit in theclaim of the petitioner that Union of India be directed to prepare a NationalPlan under Section 11 for COVID-19. National Plan, 2019 have alreadybeen there in place supplemented by various orders and measures takenby competent authorities under Disaster Management Act, 2005, thereis no occasion or need to issue any direction to Union of India to prepareBa fresh National Plan for COVID-19. We, thus, hold that Union of Indiais not obliged to prepare, notify and implement a fresh National DisasterManagement Plan for COVID-19.

QUESTION NO.II

CII) Whether the Union of India was obliged to lay down theminimum standards of relief under Section 12 of Act,2005, for COVID-19 irrespective of earlier guidelinesissued under Section 12 of the Act laying down theminimum standards of relief?

D43. Section 12 of the Act, deals with guidelines for MinimumStandards of Relief. Section 12 is as follows:- “12. Guidelines for minimum standards of relief. —TheNational Authority shall recommend guidelines for the minimumstandards of relief to be provided to persons affected by disaster,Ewhich shall include, —

(i) the minimum requirements to be provided in the relief campsin relation to shelter, food, drinking water, medical cover andsanitation;

(ii) the special provisions to be made for widows and orphans; F

(iii) ex gratia assistance on account of loss of life as alsoassistance on account of damage to houses and for restorationof means of livelihood;

(iv) such other relief as may be necessary.”

G44. The petitioner’s case as noticed above is that the Centreshould come up with detailed guidelines under Section 12(ii) and (iii) ofDisaster Management Act, 2005, recommending special provisions tobe made for widows and orphans and ex-gratia assistance to be providedto the kith and kin of those losing life because of COVID-19 infectionsbut also as a result of harsh lockdown restrictions. It is submitted thatH

there are no guidelines providing for minimum standards forCOVID-19. The above claim of the petitioner is refuted by therespondents. The respondents have brought on record the guidelines ofminimum standards of relief under Section 12 as existing prior toCOVID-19, which has been filed as Annexure-R7 to the counter affidavit.The guidelines filed as Annexure-R7 deals with

(i) definition of Relief and Rehabilitation Camp,

(ii) Minimum standards in respect of Shelter in relief camps,

(iii) Minimum Standards in respect of Food in relief camps,

(iv) Minimum Standards in respect of Water in relief camps,

(v) Minimum Standards in respect of Sanitation in relief camps,

(vi) Minimum Standards in respect of medical cover in reliefcamps and

(vii) Minimum Standards of Relief for Widows and Orphans.

45. The guidelines brought on record under Annexure-R7, whichwere in existence since before declaration of COVID-19 pandemic,covers all statutory requirement as enumerated in Section 12. Section12 contemplates minimum standards of relief to be provided to personsaffected by disaster. The word ‘disaster’ mentioned in Section 12encompasses all the disasters including the present disaster. Section 12does not contemplate that there shall be different guidelines for minimumstandards of relief for different disasters.

46. The uniform guidelines are contemplated so that personsaffected by disaster are provided with minimum requirement in the reliefcamps in respect of shelter, food, drinking water, medical cover andsanitation and other reliefs as contemplated in the section. There beingalready guidelines for minimum standards in place even beforeCOVID-19, the said guidelines for minimum standards holds good evenfor those who are affected by COVID-19. Section 12 does notcontemplate that afresh guidelines for the minimum standards of reliefbe issued with regard to COVID-19. The prayer of the petitioner todirect the Union of India to issue fresh guidelines under Section 12 to beprovided to persons infected with COVID-19 is misconceived.

47. The Government of India vide order dated 14.03.2020 hasdecided to treat COVID-19, the pandemic, as a notified disaster for the A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Apurpose of providing assistance under State Disaster Response Fund,norms of assistance for ex-gratia payment to families of deceased persons,norms of assistance for COVID-19 positive persons requiringhospitalization and some other assistance to be provided from StateDisaster Response Fund have been notified by the Government of India.

B48. In view of the foregoing discussions, we hold that Union ofIndia is not obliged to lay down minimum standards of relief under Section12 of the Act, 2005 for COVID-19 and the guidelines issued under Section12 providing for minimum standards of relief holds good for pandemicCOVID-19 also.

CQUESTION NOS. 3, 4 AND 5

III) Whether Union of India is obliged to utilise NationalDisaster Response Fund created under Section 46 of the Act forthe purpose of providing assistance in the fight of COVID-19?

IV) Whether all the contributions/grants from individualsDand institutions should be credited to the NDRF in terms ofSection 46(1)(b) of the Act rather than PM CARES Fund?

V) Whether all the funds collected in the PM CARES Fundtill date be directed to be transferred to the NDRF?

49. All the three questions being inter-related are taken together.EThe submissions of the petitioner centre around National DisasterResponse Fund (NDRF) and PM CARES Fund. We need to notice thenature and character of these funds for appreciating the submissionsmade by the learned counsel for the parties. Chapter IX of the DisasterManagement Act, 2005 deals with Finance, Accounts and Audit. SectionF46 provides for National Disaster Response Fund. Section 46 reads:

“46. National Disaster Response Fund.—(1) The CentralGovernment may, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitutea fund to be called the National Disaster Response Fund formeeting any threatening disaster situation or disaster and thereGshall be credited thereto—

(a) an amount which the Central Government may, after dueappropriation made by Parliament by law in this behalfprovide; (b) any grants that may be made by any person or institution forHthe purpose of disaster management.

(2) The National Disaster Response Fund shall be madeavailable to the National Executive Committee to be appliedtowards meeting the expenses for emergency response, relief andrehabilitation in accordance with the guidelines laid down by theCentral Government in consultation with the National Authority.”

50. The Central Government by notification dated 27.09.2010which was published in Gazette Extraordinary on 28.09.2010 issued undersub-Section (1) of Section 46 of Act, 2005 constituted “National DisasterResponse Fund”. The notification dated 27.09.2010 reads:

“MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 27[th] September, 2010

s.O.2346(E).- In exercise of the powers conferred bysub-section (1) of Section 46 of the Disaster Management Act,2005 (53 of 2005), the Central Government hereby constitutesthe National Disaster Response Fund (hereinafter NDRF) formeeting any threatening disaster situation or disaster.

51. Ministry of Home Affairs (Disaster Management Division)has issued guidelines on Constitution and Administration of the NationalDisaster Response Fund (NDRF). Section 46(1) as noted abovecontemplates crediting of two kind of amounts, i.e., (a) an amount whichthe Central Government may, after due appropriation made by Parliamentby law in this behalf provide; and (b) any grants that may be made byany person or institution for the purpose of disaster management.

52. The guidelines for constitution and administration of NDRFhave been brought on record by the petitioner at page 129 of the writpetition. The guidelines came into force with effect from financial year2010-11. Paragraph 3.1 enumerated the calamities covered under NDRF.Paragraph 3.1 is as follows:

“3.1 Natural calamities of cyclone, drought, earthquake, fire, flood,tsunami, hailstorm, landslide, avalanche, cloud burst and pest attackconsidered to be of severe nature by Government of India andrequiring expenditure by a State Government in excess of the A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

460SUPREME COURT REPORTS

Abalances available in its own State Disaster Response Fund(SDRF), will qualify for immediate relief assistance from NDRF.”53. Paragraph 5 of the guidelines deals with contribution to theNDRF. Paragraphs 5.1 to 5.5 are as follows:

“5.1 The closing balance of the NCCF at the end of financial yearB2009-10 shall be the opening balance of the NDRF in the year2010-11.

5.2 Funds will be credited into the NDRF in accordance with theprovisions of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.

C5.3 The budget provision for transferring funds to the NDRF asmentioned in para 5.2 above shall be made in the Demand forgrants no. 35- “Transfers to State and UT Governments” (undernon-plan provision). Releases to State Governments will be madeby the Ministry of Finance from this provision.

D5.4 During the years 2010-15 transfers to the NDRF establishedin the Public Account of India will be made by operating thefollowing heads of account: Major Head “2245-Relief on accountof Natural Calamities – 80- General-797-Transfers to ReserveFunds and Deposit Account’-Transfer to National DisasterResponse Fund.E5.5 Contributions made by any person or institution for the purposeof disaster management will also be credited to the NDRF.Modalities covering such contributions will be prescribed in duecourse.”

54. Paragraph 7.1 of the guidelines deals with assessment of reliefFassistance from the NDRF. Paragraph 7.1 is as follows:

“7.1 Upon a request made by a State not having adequate balancein its State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF), Ministry of HomeAffairs or the Ministry of Agriculture, as the case may be, willassess whether a case for additional assistance from NDRF isGmade out under these guidelines and the approved items and normsof assistance under NDRF/SDRF. The following procedure willbe adopted for making such assessment:

(i) The memorandum of the State Government will be examinedto assess the likely requirement of funds as per items andH

norms of expenditure under SDRF/NDRF. If the preliminaryexamination reveals that there are adequate funds in SDRFwith the State for providing relief as per norms, the Statewould be advised accordingly.

(ii) If the preliminary examination reveals that the State is inneed of assistance, a Central Team will be deputed formaking an on the spot assessment.

(iii) The report of the Central Team shall be examined by theNational Executive Committee (NEC) constituted undersection 8 of the DM Act, 2005. The NEC will assess theextent of assistance and expenditure which can be fundedfrom the NDRF, as per the norms of NDRF/SDRF, andmake recommendations.

(iv) Based on the recommendations of NEC, a High LevelCommittee (HLC) will approve the quantum of immediaterelief to be released from NDRF.”

55. The guidelines for administration of the NDRF have beenrevised with effect from financial year 2015-16 which have been broughton record at page 154 of the writ petition. Paragraph 3.1 of the guidelinesis same as under guidelines for the financial year 2010-11. Paragraph4.1 provides:

“4.1 The NDRF will be operated by the Government of India forthe purpose of providing immediate relief to people affected bythe above mentioned calamities which are assessed as being of‘severe nature’, following the procedure described in para 7 ofthese guidelines. NDRF is classified in the Public Account in thesub-section (b) ‘Reserve Funds not bearing Interest’ of theGovernment of India under the major head 8235- ‘General andother Reserve Funds’ – 119- National Disaster Response Fund”.

56. Paragraph 5 deals with contribution to the NDRF and thereare some changes in the guidelines in paragraph 5. Paragraphs 5.1 to5.4 of the new guidelines are as follows:

“5.1 The closing balance of the NDRF at the end of financialyear 2014-15 shall be the opening balance of the NDRF inthe year 2015-16.

A

B

C

D

E

G

H

A5.2 Funds will be credited into the NDRF in accordance with theprovisions of the section 46 (a) & (b) of Disaster ManagementAct, 2005.

5.3 The budget provision for transferring funds to the NDRF asmentioned in para 5.2 above shall be made in the DemandBfor grants no. 35- “Transfers to State and UT Governments”(under non-plan provision). Releases to State Governmentswill be made by the Ministry of Finance from this provision.

5.4 During the years 2015-20 transfers to the NDRF establishedin the Public Account of India will be made by operating thefollowing heads of account: Major Head “2245-Relief onCaccount of Natural Calamities – 80- General-797-Transfersto Reserve Funds and Deposit Account’-Transfer to NationalDisaster Response Fund.”

57. The above is the scheme. As per paragraph 10 of the newguidelines, expenditure from NDRF is meant to assist a State to provideDimmediate relief in those cases of severe calamity, where the expenditurerequired is in excess of the balance in the State’s SDRF. The NDRF isa statutory fund required to be audited by the Comptroller & AuditorGeneral of India, which was constituted under Act, 2005 and is still inexistence for the purposes as enumerated in the statute as well as in theguidelines issued under Act, 2005.E

58. We may now notice the PM CARES Fund. Petitioner hasbrought on record certain details of PM CARES Fund as Annexure-P13. The details about the PM CARES Fund as brought on record asAnnexure-P13 of the writ petition are as follows:

“Keeping in mind the need for having a dedicated national fundFwith the primary objective of dealing with any kind of emergencyor distress situation, like posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, andto provide relief to the affected, a public charitable trust under thename of ‘Prime Minister’s Citizen Assistance and Relief inEmergency Situations Fund’ (PM CARES Fund)’ has been setGup.

Click hereto Donate Online.

Objectives :

• To undertake and support relief or assistance of any kind relatingto a public health emergency or any other kind of emergency, H

calamity or distress, either man-made or natural, including thecreation or upgradation of healthcare or pharmaceutical facilities,other necessary infrastructure, funding relevant research or anyother type of support.

• To render financial assistance, provide grants of payments ofmoney or take such other steps as may be deemed necessary bythe Board of Trustees to the affected population.

• To undertake any other activity, which is not inconsistent withthe above Objects.

Constitution of the Trust :

• Prime Minister is the ex-officio Chairman of the PM CARESFund and Minister of Defence, Minister of Home Affairs andMinister of Finance, Government of India are ex-officio Trusteesof the Fund.

• The Chairperson of the Board of Trustees (Prime Minister) shallhave the power to nominate three trustees to the Board of Trusteeswho shall be eminent persons in the field of research, health,science, social work, law, public administration and philanthropy.

• Any person appointed a Trustee shall act in a pro bono capacity.

Other details :

• The fund consists entirely of voluntary contributions fromindividuals/ organizations and does not get any budgetary support.The fund will be utilised in meeting the objectives as stated above.

• Donations to PM CARES Fund would qualify for 80G benefitsfor 100% exemption under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Donationsto PM CARES Fund will also qualify to be counted as CorporateSocial Responsibility (CSR) expenditure under the Companies Act,2013

• PM CARES Fund has also got exemption under the FCRA anda separate account for receiving foreign donations has beenopened. This enables PM CARES Fund to accept donations andcontributions from individuals and organizations based in foreigncountries. This is consistent with respect to Prime Minister’sNational Relief Fund (PMNRF). PMNRF has also received foreigncontributions as a public trust since 2011.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

ACLICK HERE TO DONATE ONLINE”

59. From the above details, it is clear that PM CARES Fund hasbeen constituted as a public charitable trust. After outbreak ofpandemic COVID-19, need of having a dedicated national fund withobjective of dealing with any kind of emergency or distress situation, likeBposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, and to provide relief to the affected,a fund was created by constituting a trust with Prime Minister as anex-officio Chairman of PM CARES Fund, with other ex-officio andnominated Trustees of the Fund. The PM CARES Fund consists entirelyof voluntary contributions from individuals/organisations and does notget any Budgetary support. No Government money is credited in theCPM CARES Fund.

60. After noticing constitution of NDRF as well as PM CARESFund now we may notice the contentions raised by Shri Dave. Thesubmission of Shri Dave is that the earlier guidelines for administrationof NDRF which came into force with effect from financial yearD2010-11 have been modified by new guidelines with effect from financialyear 2015-16, and now it is not possible for any person or institution tomake contribution to the NDRF. Shri Dave submits that paragraph 5.5of earlier guidelines has been deleted to benefit the PM CARES Fundso that all contributions by any person or institution should go in the PMECARES Fund. Shri Dave submits that deletion of paragraph 5.5 of earlierguidelines (at page 130) in the new guidelines (at page 154-155) makesit clear that now it is not possible for any person or institution to makeany contribution to NDRF.

61. There are two reasons for not accepting the above submission.FFirstly, paragraph 5.5 of earlier guidelines which contemplatedcontributions by any person or institution for the purpose of disastermanagement to the NDRF are very much still there in the new guidelines,which have come into force with effect from financial year 2015-16.New guidelines contain the same heading, i.e., “Contribution to theNDRF” and guideline 5.2 provides “Funds will be credited into the NDRFGin accordance with the provisions of the Section 46(1)(a) & (b) of theDisaster Management Act, 2005.” The above guideline 5.2 specificallyreferred to Section 46(1)(a) & (b) and Section 46(1)(b) expressly providesthat any grants that may be made by any person or institution for thepurpose of disaster management shall be credited into the NDRF. TheHsubmission that after the new guidelines, it is not possible for any person or institution to make any contribution to the NDRF is, thus, misconceivedand incorrect. According to the statutory provisions of Section 46 aswell as new guidelines enforced with effect from financial year 2015-16any person or institution can still make contribution to the NDRF.

A

62. Secondly, the PM CARES Fund has been constituted in theyear 2020 after outbreak of pandemic COVID-19 whereas the newguidelines came into force with effect from 2015-16, on which date thePM CARES Fund was not in existence, hence, the submission that newguidelines were amended to benefit the PM CARES Fund is whollymisconceived.

B

63. Another limb of submission of Shri Dave is that although theCGovernment of India vide its letter dated 14.03.2020 has decided to treatCOVID-19 as a notified disaster for the purpose of providing assistanceunder SDRF but no similar notification has been issued for the purposeof providing assistance for COVID-19 under NDRF. The notificationdated 14.03.2020 has been brought on record as Annexure-P10 of theDwrit petition which reads as follows:

“No.33-4/2020-NDM-IGovernment of IndiaMinistry of Home Affairs(Disaster Management Division)

E

C-Wing, 3[rd] Floor, NDCC-IIJai Singh Road, New Delhi -110001

Dated 14.03.2020

F

To

The Chief Secretaries

(All States)

Subject: Items and Norms of assistance from the StateDisaster Response Fund (SDRF) in wake of COVID-19Virus Outbreak G

H

[2020] 11 S.C.R.

ASir/Madam

I am directed to refer this Ministry’s letter No.32-7/2014dated 8[th] April, 2015 on the above mentioned subject.

2. The Central Government, keeping in view the spread ofCOVID-19 virus in India and the declaration of COVID-19 asBpandemic by the World Health Organisation (WHO), by way of aspecial one time dispensation, has decided to treat it as a notifieddisaster for the purpose of providing assistance under SDRF. Alist of items and norms of assistance for containment ofCOVID-19 Virus in India eligible from SDRF is annexed.

C

Yours faithfully,

D

(Sanjeev Kumar Jindal)Joint Secretary to Government of IndiaTel: 23438096

E

Copy to AS(UT), MHA for making similar provisions for utilizationof UT Disaster Response Funds by the Union Territories.

CC for information: PS to HM/MOS(N)/HS”

64. After issuance of the above notification, the Government ofFIndia, Ministry of Home Affairs (Disaster Management Division) issuedorder of 03.04.2020 on the subject: “Advance release of Central sharefrom State Disaster Risk Management Fund (SDRMF) for the year2020-21”. By the said order the Central Government has released firstinstalment of Rs. 11,092/- crores out of Rs.22,184/- crores which wasGthe Central Share of SDRMF. All States have been allocated differentamounts for the purpose of providing assistance under SDRMF. Annexureto the said notification is at page 161, which indicates that maximumgrant allocated was to the State of Maharashtra as Rs.1,611/- crores asfirst instalment and minimum amount to State of Goa, i.e., Rs.6/- croresby the Centre. The notification dated 14.03.2020 clearly permits providingH

the assistance under SDRMF for COVID-19. In event, any Stateexpenditure is in excess of the balance in the State’s SDRMF, the Stateis entitled for the release of fund from NDRF as it is clear from newguidelines filed at pages 154 to 158 of the writ petition. The submissionof the petitioner that NDRF cannot be used for any assistance forCOVID-19, thus, cannot be accepted.

65. There is one more aspect of the matter which needs to benoted. When the Centre is providing financial assistance to the State totake measures to contain COVID-19, as we have noticed above that byorder dated 03.04.2020 first instalment of Rs. 11,092/- crores which isthe Central Share to the SDRMF has been given and there is nothing onrecord that any State has exceeded the expenditure in excess of thebalance in the State’s SDRMF, there is no occasion of asking more fundby the State from NDRF. When the Central Government is providingfinancial assistance to the States to contain COVID-19 it is not for anyPIL petitioner to say that Centre should give amount from this fund orthat fund. The financial planning is in the domain of the CentralGovernment, which financial planning is made after due deliberation andconsideration. We, thus, do not find any substance in the submission ofthe petitioner that there is any statutory restriction/prohibition in utilizationof NDRF for COVID-19. More so when sub-section (2) of Section 46specifically provides that NDRF shall be made available to the NationalExecutive Committee to be applied towards meeting the expenses foremergency response, relief and rehabilitation in accordance with theguidelines laid down by the Central Government, the NDRF can be usedfor containment of COVID-19.

66. Further as observed above, it is for the Central Governmentto take the decision as from which fund what financial measures are tobe taken and it is neither for PIL petitioner to claim that any financialassistance be made from particular fund nor this Court to sit in judgmentover the financial decisions of the Central Government.

67. The PM CARES Fund is a public charitable trust and is not aGovernment fund. The charitable trusts are public trusts. Black’s LawDictionary, Tenth Edition defines charitable trust in following words:

“charitable trust. A trust created to benefit a specific charity,specific charities, or the general public rather than a privateindividual or entity. Charitable trusts are often eligible for favorabletax treatment.”

AB

C

D

E

F

G

H

A

68. The mere fact that administration of the Trust is vested intrustees, i.e., a group of people, will not itself take away the publiccharacter of the Trust as has been laid down in Mulla Gulam Ali &Safiabai D. Trust Vs. Deelip Kumar & Co., (2003) 11 SCC 772. Inparagraph 4, this Court laid down:

B“4. The mere fact that the control in respect of the administrationof the Trust vested in a group of people will not itself take away the public character of the Trust……………………………..”

69. The contributions made by individuals and institutions in thePM CARES Fund are to be released for public purpose to fulfill theCobjective of the trust. The PM CARES Fund is a charitable trustregistered under the Registration Act, 1908 at New Delhi on 27.03.2020.The trust does not receive any Budgetary support or any Governmentmoney. It is not open for the petitioner to question the wisdom of trusteesto create PM CARES fund which was constituted with an objective toextend assistance in the wake of public health emergency that is pandemicDCOVID-19.

70. Shri Dave during submissions has fairly submitted that he isnot questioning the bona fide of constitution of PM CARES Fund. Hissubmission is that NDRF is audited by CAG but PM CARES Fund isnot audited by CAG rather by a private Chartered Accountant. TheEnature of NDRF and PM CARES Fund are entirely different. Theguidelines issued under Act, 2005 with regard to NDRF specificallyprovides for audit of the NDRF by the Comptroller & Auditor Generalof India whereas for public charitable trust there is no occasion for auditby the Comptroller & Auditor General of India.F

71. We may notice one more aspect with regard to COVID-19.We have noticed above that guidelines which were issued for constitutionand administration of NDRF and State’s SDRMF, the guidelines providedutilization of fund for limited calamities, which did not include any biologicaland public health emergency. We have already noticed Clause 3.1 ofGguidelines for administration of NDRF, which did not provide for thecalamities which cover the biological and public health emergency. Thus,under the guidelines which were in existence with effect from financialyear 2015-16 neither NDRF nor SDRF covered the biological and publichealth emergencies. It was only by notification dated 14.03.2020 thatCOVID-19 was treated as notified disaster for the purpose of providingH

assistance under SDRF. Obviously prior to this notification dated14.03.2020 no contribution by any person or institution in the NDRFcould have been made with respect to specified disaster, namely, biologicaland public health emergency like COVID-19, Outbreak of COVID-19in India as well as other countries of the World required immediateenhancement in the infrastructure of medical health and creation of fundto contain COVID-19. At this need of the hour no exception can betaken to the constitution of a public charitable trust, namely, PM CARESFund to have necessary financial resources to meet the emergentsituation.

72. The NDRF and PM CARES Fund are two entirely differentfunds with different object and purpose. In view of the foregoingdiscussions, we answer question Nos.3, 4 and 5 in following manner:

Answer 3. The Union of India can very well utilize the NDRFfor providing assistance in the fight of COVID-19 pandemic byway of releasing fund on the request of the States as per newguidelines.

Answer 4. Any contribution, grant of any individual or institutionis not prohibited to be credited into the NDRF and it is still openfor any person or institution to make contribution to the NDRF interms of Section 46(1)(b) of the Act, 2005. The contribution byany person or by any institution in PM CARES Fund is voluntaryand it is open for any person or institution to make contribution tothe PM CARES Fund.

Answer 5. The funds collected in the PM CARES Fund areentirely different funds which are funds of a public charitabletrust and there is no occasion for issuing any direction to transferthe said funds to the NDRF.

73. In view of the foregoing discussions, the prayer ‘a’ and ‘b’made in the writ petition are refused. With respect to prayer ‘c’, wemake it clear (i) that there is no statutory prohibition for the Union ofIndia utilizing the NDRF for providing assistance in the fight of COVID-19 in accordance with the guidelines issued for administration of NDRF;(ii) there is no statutory prohibition in making any contribution by anyperson or institution in the NDRF as per Section 46(1)(b)of the Act,2005.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

470SUPREME COURT REPORTS

[2020] 11 S.C.R.

A74. The prayer of the petitioner to direct all the funds collected inthe PM CARES Fund till date to be transferred to the NDRF is refused.

75. Subject to clarification of law as made above, the writ petitionis dismissed.

B

Ankit Gyan

Writ Petition dismissed.

C

D

E

F

G

H