Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
On Thursday, the Karnataka High Court sought the central and state governments' response to a public interest litigation (PIL) petition questioning the Karnataka government's restrictions on public movement between the Kerala-Karnataka border due to the Covid-19 pandemic. A petition has been filed by Advocate B Subbaya Rai representing the residents of the Karnataka-Kerala border regions and also the Dakshina Kannada district and Kasaragod district of Kerala was heard by the Division Bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum.
The plea stated that the residents of the districts of Dakshina Kannada and Kasaragod district of Kerala are interdependent with each other in the city of Mangaluru in terms of employment, trade, commerce, education, and major hospitals. More than 80,000 individuals, i.e. 35 to 40 percent, living near the border areas, have been reported to travel daily for the aforementioned purposes. As of now, in the district of Kasaragod, Kerala-Karnataka road on the Thalappady, Nettanige, Mudunuru, Monala, Saradakka, and Jalsoor stretch in the district of Kasaragod allows passengers with negative RT-PCR reports, while the rest of the border control posts are closed, says the plea.
In 2020, the central and state governments took effective steps to deter the spread of Covid by means of a lock-down process, including the closure of the frontier regions of each state, including the boundaries of Kerala and Karnataka, the petitioner submitted. Shortly thereafter, Karnataka released a circular dated 16 February 2021, recommending, with immediate effect, some special monitoring procedures for arrivals from Kerala to Karnataka.
On February 18, the Deputy Commissioner of the Regional Disaster Management Authority, Dakshina Kannada, who is also an authority under the DM Act, released an order restricting public travel from the district of Kasaragod to the district of Dakshina Kannada. It is the contention of the petitioner that the order challenged is contrary to the directions given by the central and state governments. The petitioner stated that, by the order in the challenge, the general population living in the border areas will be jeopardized by road transport for their livelihood, schooling, commerce, trade, and health. The petitioner claimed that the guidelines provided by the Central Government and the circular issued by the State Government do not prohibit the movement of the public closer to the borders, but that certain protocols, such as the establishment of negative RT-PCR records, are also laid down. On these grounds, the petition prayed for the 16 February order to be quashed.
86540
103860
630
114
59824