Girija Devi v. The State Of Gnct Of Delhi, Through The Chief Secretary, & ORS.
$~12 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ GIRIJA DEVI .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Raja Choudhary, Mr. Kumar Sourav, Mr. Sanyam Jain and Mr.
Japdeep Singh Chahal, Advocates.
versus THE STATE OF GNCT OF DELHI, THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. Rishikesh Kumar, ASC with Ms.
Sheenu Priya, Mr. Atik Gill and Mr.
Vikas Saini, Advocates for GNCTD.
Mr. Manu Chaturvedi SC for MCD.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R
% 28.11.2024 1.
Through the instant writ petition, the Petitioner seeks directions to the Respondents to release ex-gratia compensation amounting to INR 1 Crore, under the Cabinet Decision No. 2835 dated 13th May, 2020. The claim arises from the demise of her husband - Mr. Shivnath Prasad who was working as a teacher at MCD Primary Boys School, Nithari No. 2/II during the COVID19 pandemic. The background of the case is as follows: 1.1.
Late Mr. Shivanth Prasad was employed as a teacher at MCD Primary Boys School, Nithari No. 2/II. The Petitioner asserts that her husband was tested with COVID-19 on 24th April, 2021 while discharging his duties and subsequently succumbed to this infection on 28th April, 2021. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
1.2.
In this background, on 8th September 2021, the Education Department of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, informed the Petitioner about the approval of ex-gratia assistance of INR 1 crore and requested the Petitioner to provide documents, including the death report, deployment order for COVID-19 duty, cancelled cheque, and other relevant documents. The translated copy of the said communication reads as follows: 1.3.
Subsequently, the MCD, education department, issued a communication dated 17th September, 2021 informing the Petitioner that there was an error in the earlier communication and the amount of ex-gratia had not been sanctioned. The translated copy of the said communication reads as follows:
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
2.
Placing reliance on these discrepancies, the Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 seeking a mandamus to the Respondents to provide the ex-gratia assistance of INR 1 crore.
3.
The Court has considered the aforenoted contentions. Respondent No.2 through communication dated 27th December, 2021 has categorically declined the Petitioner's request for ex-gratia compensation in the following terms:
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
4.
The communication dated 8th September, 2021 issued earlier, created some confusion. However, in the opinion of the Court, just because Respondent No.3 had in the communication dated 8th September, 2021 called upon the Petitioner to submit the necessary documents for processing the ex-gratia compensation, it cannot be said that a firm decision had been taken to allow the Petitioner's request. The Petitioner must establish their entitlement under Cabinet Decision No. 2835 dated 13th May, 2020. 5.
On this issue, counsel for the Petitioner, argues that the Petitioner's husband was on COVID-19 duty when he contracted the disease, thereby The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
fulfilling the criteria for award of ex-gratia compensation. To that effect, he places reliance on a communication dated 13th April, 2021 which reads as follows:
6.
In the opinion of the Court, the aforenoted allocation of duties to the Petitioner's husband does not fulfil the criteria of the Cabinet Decision No. 2835 dated 13th May, 2020. This Court in Subata Khan V Govt. of NCT of Delhi1 and Prem Wati and Others V. GNCTD and others & Ors.2 has 1 Decision dated 12th November, 2024 W.P.(C) 15681/2024 2 Decision dated 14th November 2024 in WP(C) 2136/2023 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
already examined the object, scope and ambit of the said Cabinet Decision dated 13th May, 2020. The relevant portion of the decision in Prem Wati is reproduced herein below:
"7.
The Court has considered the aforenoted contentions but is not convinced. The decision rendered by the GoM vide the Minutes of Meeting dated 25th September, 2023 denying the grant of compensation, was passed after deliberations on the applicability of the Cabinet Decision No. 2835 dated 13th May, 2020, which categorically provides that the exgratia compensation was to be granted to the families of employees who were deployed for COVID-19 duties and who succumbed to the disease during discharge of these duties. As noted by the GoM, there is a distinction between COVID-19 duties and routine duties, as envisaged by the cabinet decision. COVID-19 duties are understood to be the specific COVID-19 related responsibilities involving treatment, facilitation, or care of COVID-19 patients.
Thus, the rationale behind the cabinet decision was to recognize the extraordinary risks faced by such individuals engaged in such high-risk duties and to compensate families of employees who died to the disease as they were under high risk of contracting the infection due to exposure to COVID-19 patients. 8.
The case of the Petitioners has been duly considered by the GoM and it was found that Late Mr. Akhilesh Chandra was found to be performing his routine duties as a shift incharge with the Delhi Jal Board and his duty was not considered to be part of the special COVID-19 related duties.
9.
The Petitioners' reliance on the case of Pooja v. State of GNCT Of Delhi & Ors. to claim discriminatory treatment is misplaced. The facts of the said case are entirely on a different footing than the case of the Petitioners. In the case of Pooja v. State of GNCTD the deceased was a Delhi Police Constable who passed away while he was posted on duty at Deep Chand Bandhu Hospital to ensure adherence of the COVID-19 lockdown measures. Therefore, it was unequivocally esblished in that case that the deceased had contracted the infection while performing COVID19 specific duty. In contrast, Late Shri Akhilesh Chandra was not assigned any special COVID-19-related duties. Records indicate that he was engaged in his routine responsibilities as a shift in-charge and water pump operator at the time he contracted the infection. Thus, the cases are distinguishable on facts, and the comparison drawn by the Petitioners does not hold merit.
10. It is beyond doubt that Late Shri Akhilesh Chandra was engaged in duties vital to public welfare as a shift in-charge and water pump operator, ensuring the uninterrupted functioning of essential water supply systems during a time of national crisis. However, the Cabinet Decision No.
dated 13th May, 2020, limits the grant of ex-gratia The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
compensation to employees deployed on duties directly related to COVID19, such as patient care, relief work, or containment zone operations. While the Court acknowledges the significance of the deceased's contributions, but the nature of his duties does not satisfy the strict eligibility criteria. The Cabinet Decision was formualted with an intent to recognize and compensate individuals who undertook extraordinary risks in combating the pandemic, exposing themselves to heightened danger. Expanding the scope of this policy to include all essential service providers would not only dilute its intent but also risk opening the floodgates for claims that fall outside the scope of the decision. 11. Thus, in light of the foregoing, the Court is of the considered view that the decision rendered by the Respondents does not warrant interference.
It reflects a reasoned application of the policy framework and does not appear to suffer from arbitrariness or any legal infirmity. The Court, while deeply empathetic to the loss suffered by the Petitioners, finds no justification to intervene in the matter. Furthermore, ex-gratia payments are discretionary and not a matter of right. They are granted as a compassionate gesture in extraordinary circumstances, subject to the specific terms and conditions outlined in the governing policy. The Court finds that the decision-making process followed by the GoM was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable.
12. In view of the above, the Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition and the same is dismissed, along with pending application(s), if any."
7.
Thus, there is a distinction between COVID-19 duties and routine duties. COVID-19 duties are understood to be the specific COVID-19 related responsibilities involving treatment, facilitation, or care of COVID19 patients. The Petitioner's reliance on the communication dated 13th April, 2021 fails to demonstrate that the Petitioner was assigned to COVID-19 related duties such as those detailed above. Therefore, this Court sees no error in the decision dated 27th December, 2021, by which Respondent No. 2 concluded that the Petitioner's husband was carrying out his 'routine duties' and was not assigned to COVID-19 related duties, making the Petitioner ineligible for the ex-gratia award.
8.
That apart, the Petitioner has also placed reliance on a letter dated 24th The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
April, 2023, issued by the principal of MCD Primary Boys school, to demonstrate that 'corona vaccination' was a part of her husband's duties and hence the same falls in category of COVID-19 duties. A translated copy of the said letter reads as follows:
However, this is simply an acknowledgment from the principal of the school where late Mr. Shivnath Prasad was employed, recognizing the work he carried out. There is no evidence on record to indicate that he was assigned such duties by or under the direction of the Government of NCT of Delhi, which is a necessary condition for granting the ex-gratia compensation. 9.
In view of the above, the Court finds no merit in the present petition and the same is dismissed.
SANJEEV NARULA, J NOVEMBER 28, 2024 nk The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.