Why restricted COVID-19 vaccination in India when vaccines are being donated, sold to foreign countries: Delhi High Court to Central govt

The Delhi High Court on Thursday emphasised that there has to be a "sense of urgency" in respect of COVID-19 vaccination within the country and directed the Central government to file an affidavit explaining the rationale behind allowing vaccinations only for persons who are above 60 years of age or are above 45 years with co-morbidities (Court on its own motion vs UOI - vaccination of members of judicial fraternity). .The Court observed that it appeared that the full capacity of the two vaccine manufacturers, Serum Institute of India and Bharat Biotech is not being exploited since vaccines are being donated and sold to foreign nations. .The direction was passed by a Division Bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Rekha Palli after the counsel for Serum Institute of India and Bharat Biotech submitted that they had the capacity to accommodate members of the legal fraternity for their vaccination on priority. ."If the two institutes say they have the capacity, it seems their capacity is not being exploited to full capacity.. At the same time, we are donating, selling vaccines to foreign countries..There has to be a sense of urgency," the Court remarked. .The counsel for Bharat Biotech, advocate Vipin Nair nonetheless sought to the know requisite numbers that the institute should be looking at in case vaccination is opened for legal fraternity. ."If ambit of PIL is the entire judiciary, we should know where the goal post is," he said. .The Bar Council of Delhi and Delhi High Court Bar Associations have now been asked to bring on record the strength of their members so as to ascertain the number of lawyers in the fraternity. .The Court also directed the two vaccine manufacturers to file affidavits on their capacity to manufacture the vaccines, their unutilised capacity and the extent to which their capacities can be extended. .In its affidavit, the Central government will also indicate its capacity to transport the vaccines and the extent to which it is being used..During the course of the hearing, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma and Standing Counsel Anil Soni informed the Court that selection of classes of people for vaccination was a policy decision that was taken by an expert body and as of now, it is limited to who are above 60 years of age or are above 45 years with co-morbidities..Following a suggestion made during the hearing, the Court directed the Delhi Government to carry out inspection of medical facilities in court complexes and to report whether vaccination centres could be created there for the legal fraternity. .As the counsel in the hearing informed that similar issues were pending before the Supreme Court and a Single Bench of the High Court, the Court clarified, "This petition is to find out if the whole judicial system can be prioritised without age limit and co morbidity.".Yesterday, the High Court had registered a suo motu PIL case concerning COVID-19 vaccination of judges, court staff and lawyers on priority..[BREAKING] Weight in claim to declare judges, lawyers as frontline workers: Delhi High Court registers PIL for COVID-19 vaccination on priority.The Court had observed that prima facie, there was weight in the claim made by the Bar Council of Delhi for declaring all persons associated with the judicial functioning, which includes the Judges, the Court Staff and the lawyers as frontline workers..The matter would be heard next on March 10. .Read complete account of the hearing here: