In the Rajasthan High Court, a Writ Petition has been filed to overturn a State Government decision prohibiting accessibility to indoor sports, gyms, restaurants, and other public spaces to those who have received at least one vaccination dosage. decree also prohibits city buses, as well as other marketplaces and organizations, from operating based on vaccination status. The petitioner, a social activist, is apprehensive that the contested decision makes vaccination mandatory and discriminates against others who are in similar positions based on their vaccination.
The order is arbitrary and discriminatory, according to the petition, and it violates Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Indian Constitution. It states,
“The impugned order by making COVID19 vaccination mandatory in nature fails to create a level playing field for all as it ignores ground realities such as accessibility to vaccine centres, technical barriers in registration on CoWIN portal, pre-medical conditions (allergies), vaccination for specially-abled people etc., and affords no exemptions/ relaxations to those unable to comply with the same due to reasons mentioned above.”
The petitioner, who has been represented by Advocates Nishchay Nigam and Himanshu Kala, contended that the order is relied on an arbitrary classification, notably, the status of COVID-19 vaccination, with no rational nexus imposing an embargo on the individual’s right to pursue with his or her occupation and/or profession, and therefore on the right to life. It accuses the state of Rajasthan of partaking in a shady exercise of authority by endeavoring to constrain citizens’ fundamental rights in a way that cannot be done explicitly.
Further to that, the petition asserts that Clauses (3) and (5) of the contested order compel enterprises and business owners to comply with the arbitrary and unjustified requirement that 60% of their employees be vaccinated in order to work additional hours.
It segregates among citizens based on their vaccination status, restricting their ability to practice any profession or engage in any trade or business as guaranteed by Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, 1950.
By citing Common Cause v. Union of India 2018, the petition argues for the right to self-determination and autonomy in medical care decisions.
Join Lawcutor whatsApp for more updates.