Can Law Permits State to Deny Medical Facility to Non Residents; In Context of Recent Delhi’s Govt. Decision”

Author:- Himanshu Raj of Chanakya national Law University, Patna

The Delhi government declared on Sunday, 7 June, that emergency clinics in Delhi would just treat occupants of Delhi until the COVID-19 circumstance improves. The limitation reaches out to private medical clinics also, in spite of the fact that emergency clinics run by the focal government have been excluded. While outrageous measures are required to handle the pandemic, the administration seems to have overlooked the established plan of things.

Delhi government has told that residents are identified by various documents like Aadhar Card, Ration Card etc. This decision led to the huge hue and cry across the nation. Everyone told that this decision is arbitrary and unconstitutional. People have argued that in this time of pandemic everyone should cooperate each other and not to discriminate on providing treatment on the basis of resident, non- resident. After several protest Lieutenant governor of Delhi has overruled the decision of Delhi government.

In this article we will discuss about whether laws permit state government to do so or not? Several cases were filed in different courts to overrule this order. In this article we will discuss about some constitutional provisions which make this particular decision arbitrary and violative of basic fundamental rights. Before this we have recall the judgment of Kerala HC where he ordered union govt to ensure that there is no blockage of boundaries between the states so that people can go easily to avail health facilities. It may likewise be applicable to recollect that the Delhi High Court as of late needed to intercede after Haryana had fixed its fringes, cutting the gracefully of basic products and enterprises to Delhi, and in this manner making issues for occupants of Delhi

Article 21 – Article 21 talks about right to life and Supreme Court in numerous judgments stated that right to life includes right to health. In a case of Majdoor samiti SC held that it is obligation of state government to provide health facility and without providing healthy life and health facility right to life cannot be achieved. Apart from article 21 many international convention tell that no one can deny health facility on the basis of socio, economic reasons.

Article- 14- article 14 of Indian constitution protects us from any arbitrary classification. The order of Delhi government doesn’t show any understandable differentia – the variables to decide order are innately self-assertive. The rules express that as confirmation of residency of a patient, they need document like visa, Aadhar card, and so on would be utilized. In that capacity, the rules unmistakably bar individuals who may be in Delhi in any case – for example, understudies or laborers who probably won’t be lasting occupants of Delhi (and accordingly, don’t have travel papers with a Delhi address), yet may be briefly dwelling in Delhi. The move additionally bombs the sensible nexus test – for example, a transient specialist going through Delhi could fall wiped out yet would not be given any treatment.

 Another article which promotes health facility among citizen is article 39-A. as per this article government is under obligation to provide minimum health facility. It comes under the ambit of DPSP and state government should implement these things in their policies.

So overall article 1 of Indian constitution states that India is union of state and each state together constitutes a nation. In our constitution it is also said that each state government possess responsibility towards each other. They cannot shed their responsibility towards any citizen. This shows that the decision of Delhi government is not only unconstitutional but immoral as well.  Cooperation is the only key to get over this pandemic and this kind of behavior is highly unacceptable.