"By that logic, we have to close down the Court", Karnataka HC dismisses PIL seeking to move COVID-19 test laboratory from residential area

The Karnataka High Court today dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by two residents seeking directions to the authorities to shift or close down a COVID-19 testing laboratory in their locality..A Division Bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice M Nagaprasanna refused to entertain the petition on the ground that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to a private entity as it is not an agency or instrumentality of the State.."We cannot issue a writ of mandamus to Respondent 4 (Mediclu Diagnostics and Speciality Centre)...It is a company or a firm, we do not know", said the Bench. .Further, the Bench observed,."The petitioner counsel is unable to point out any statutory provisions which impose an embargo on setting up a laboratory in residential society for collecting swab samples of COVID-19. In absence of any such provision we cannot direct the state government to cancel permission, if any, granted to Mediclu Diagnostics and Speciality Centre."Karnataka High Court.Advocate Bharat Kumar S, appearing for the petitioners, had contended that many patients were standing in the queue outside the lab to undergo COVID-19 testing. This poses as a threat to the people residing in the said residential area, he claimed..It was further claimed that the staff taking the swab test were not wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) kits. Even after approaching the local corporator of the area, no action has been taken, the petitioners argued. Kumar relied upon certain photographs to further buttress his arguments. .In response, the Court asked, ."Assuming that everyone standing in the queue is positive of COVID-19, can the infection be spread because people are standing in queue?".The Court added,."By that logic, we will have to close down the Court, because 13 members have tested positive for COVID-19. One staff member in the Government Advocates office has tested positive, does that mean the government advocates cannot appear in any matter?".Unsatisfied with the petitioner's arguments, the Court remarked,."The laboratory has to be there somewhere, where it (COVID-19) can be tested. Somebody else's backyard, not in my backyard, that's your approach.".On the grievance of petitioners that the lab is not taking precautionary measures, the Court granted liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to the district health officer and Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP). ."If substance is found in the grievance, the respondents can issue necessary instruction to the respondent 4", the Court concluded. .On these grounds, the Court disposed of the matter.