Representation to allow commute of Mumbai Lawyers in special local trains running amid COVID-19 rejected: State tells Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court was informed today that the State's Disaster Management Authority has dismissed representations made to ease restrictions for the commute of lawyers amid the COVID-19 pandemic and allow their travel in special local trains meant for "essential service workers.".The Court was hearing the plea seeking the inclusion of lawyers as essential services for commute in the local trains. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Madhav Jamdar is hearing the matter (Chirag Chanani and Ors. v. Union of India and Anr)..A list of “essential services workers” permitted to commute in local trains plied by the Western Railway and the State Government amid the pandemic is the subject of challenge in the petition filed by three Mumbai-based advocates..During the hearing, the Advocate-General submitted to the Court an order passed by Kishor Raje Nimbalkar, Secretary, Disaster Management, Relief, and Rehabilitation dismissing the representations made by lawyers and lawyers groups in the State..“... it is just not possible to accede to the requests made … to permit lawyers and/or their employees/personal staff, to travel by Mumbai Suburban Railway."Order issued by Disaster Management authority.The order records the statistics for coronavirus infections and deaths in Maharashtra and in Mumbai while reiterating the stance taken by the State during prior hearings..List of "essential service workers" allowed travel in local trains amid COVID not violative of Advocate's Right to Practice: State to Bom HC.The authority has rejected the lawyers representations by emphasizing that:the restrictions on commute in local trains is to ensure social distancing and avoid overcrowding,the (local train) facility was first available only to staff providing essential services, but has now been expanded to include other members of the public who “are helping in bringing the economy to normal.”the Court in its July 10 Order had specifically held that lawyers were not covered by the expression “essential service” as defined in Section 2(a) of the Maharashtra Essential Services Maintenance Act, 2017.it was within the “exclusive domain” of the State legislature to legislate upon whose services are included within the ambit of the essential services..“In so far as availability of travel facility by local trains is concerned, it need not be emphasized that the local trains in normal situation are always literally overflowing and not just over-crowded with passengers”, the authority has added..The order also refutes the averment that lawyers were unable to go to court and argue hearings on account of the disruption in train services..“... in none of the aforesaid representations any data is placed on record giving details of matters which got dismissed on account of non-appearance of Advocate and/or on account of non-appearance of Advocate any prejudice has been caused to any litigant. Not a single instance, there being none, has been mentioned where the absence of a lawyer has caused any hindrance in the working of any court or proceedings thereof.”states the Authority's order..The authority also points out that several other applications by various organisations and groups are pending with the State Government seeking permission for commute. .While many of these organisations may be justified in their requests, the authority notes that the State has not allowed any person from any of these organisations to presently travel by local train..The order adds that the Delhi High Court's order permitting lawyers to travel between Haryana and NCT is distinguishable from the case before the Court. The Maharashtra government has not denied such movement of advocates by road, it is pointed out..Delhi HC directs Uttar Pradesh Govt to issue weekly e-passes for movement of advocates from Noida, Ghaziabad to Delhi.As to concerns about transport and commute generally, the authority said that travel by private vehicles was permitted. This was, however, subject to compliance with physical distancing norms. E-Passes could be obtained for inter-district travel. A prohibition on movement into and from containment zones remains..In view of the development, the Court granted the petitioners liberty to amend their plea and adjourned the matter..Read the Disaster Management Authority's Order here:.Read the Bombay High Court's Order here: