Mehraj Ahmed Ansari Gazi Salahuddin Ahmed Ansari v. The Union Of India And Others

1 949-PIL 29-2020.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 29 OF 2020 Mehraj Ahmed Ansari s/o Gazi Salahuddin Ahmed Ansari .. Petitioner

Versus

The Union of India and others .. Respondents Mr. S. S. Kazi, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr. S. G. Karlekar, AGP for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Mr. S. G. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for Respondent No. 4. CORAM :

S. V. GANGAPURWALA & SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATED : 09th DECEMBER, 2020.

PER COURT:- .

Mr. Kazi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the facilities at the COVID care centres were not properly provided. The patients of COVID-19 are increasing in the city. The suspected COVID19 patients are kept in quarantine centres. Many persons in the COVID care centres have made grievance about improper quality of food. Sometimes even insects are found in the food supplied to these persons. The learned counsel further submits that one of the practicing advocate has filed his affidavit. He was in a quarantine centre for about five days. The conditions were horrible. There are only three washrooms / toilets for all 200 people quarantined. In that period the

2 949-PIL 29-2020.odt bed sheets were not changed for five days. The drinking water facility was not hygienic. The newspaper reports would also testify the said fact.

2.

Mr. Chapalgaonkar, learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation submits that necessary arrangement of breakfast, lunch, dinner, tea, coffee is made by the corporation at every quarantine centre and COVID care centre. The Corporation did not receive any complaint about the quality of the food. The Corporation assures this Court that as and when irregularity is noticed and pointed out, care is taken to reduce the same on priority basis. The learned counsel further submits that, now there are hardly any patients in the quarantine centres. In the last week number of patients were less than 100 in the quarantine centres and this week it has again reduced. According to the learned counsel, the advocate who had filed affidavit and another lady were reluctant to come to the quarantine centre. They were persuaded by the officers of the Corporation to go quarantine center against their wish and in this background the false allegations were made. 3.

It appears that the litigation was filed in July 2020 when the COVID-19 was at its peak. The situation according to the parties has eased. Now the number of COVID-19 cases have reduced. The Corporation

3 949-PIL 29-2020.odt has also permitted home quarantine, as such, the persons in the quarantine centres have also reduced. None the less, the fact remains that the Corporation is expected to provide best of the facilities in these quarantine centres. The Corporation is expected to look after proper hygiene, infrastructure and the basic amenities in these quarantine centres. We record the statement of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation that if any irregularity is noticed or pointed out, care would be taken to reduce the same on priority basis. 4.

We hope and trust that the Corporation would abide by the affidavit filed in the present litigation.

5.

It appears that now with the passage of time the purpose of public interest litigation stands served.

6.

In the light of above, public interest litigation is disposed of. No costs.

7.

The petitioner was directed to deposit Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) in this Court. The petitioner is allowed to withdraw the same.

( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI ) ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE JUDGE P.S.B.