The families of Covid-19 victims, including those involved in relief operations, are going to be given Rs 50,000 compensation from the State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF), the Centre on Wednesday told the Supreme Court.
The National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) has framed guidelines during this regard following directions issued by the highest court.
The families of these who died of Covid-19 will need to apply for compensation within the Disaster Management Office of their respective district along side medical/death certificate mentioning ‘death thanks to corona’.
The compensation are going to be paid against not only the deaths that have already occurred except for future ones, the Centre said.
India has thus far recorded 4.46 lakh lakh deaths thanks to Covid-19 which was declared a disaster under the Disaster Management Act.
The top court had on June 30 directed the NDMA to border guidelines for payment of compensation to the kin of these who died thanks to Covid, saying the authority was statutorily mandated to supply minimum relief, including ex-gratia to the victims of the pandemic.
Holding that by not providing an ex-gratia amount, the NDMA had failed in discharging its statutory duty, a Bench led by Justice Ashok Bhushan had directed the NDMA to work out in six weeks the ex-gratia amount to be paid to the family of every Covid victim.
However, it had said it won’t be proper for the court to direct a specific amount to be paid.
On September 3, it had expressed displeasure over delay in framing guidelines for issuance of death certificates to the families of Covid-19 victims.
The order had come on PILs seeking an ex-gratia compensation of Rs 4 lakh each to the kin of these who lost their lives thanks to Covid pandemic.
The Centre had opposed it, contending that giving an ex-gratia amount of Rs 4 lakh each to kin of Covid victims wasn’t possible thanks to limited resources because it would affect pandemic response on other aspects, resulting in more damage than good. It had also cautioned the court against getting into the domain of the chief because it may need unintended constitutional ramifications.