Orissa High Court
The Director General vs Upali Aparjita Lenka And on 15 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.A. No.246 of 2023
The Director General, .... Appellants
Employees' State Insurance
Corporation, New Delhi and
others
Mr. A. P. Ray, Advocate
-versus-
Upali Aparjita Lenka and .... Respondents
others
M/s. B. Jena and associates, Advocates for Respondents 1 and 2
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER
Order No. 15.03.2023
02. 1. The present appeal is directed against a judgment dated 10th
January, 2023 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of
W.P.(C) No.21400 of 2022 filed by the Respondents, who are the
legal representatives of one late Shri Sanjay Kumar Nayak, who
died on 20th June, 2021. The prayer in the writ petition was for a
direction to the Employees' State Insurance (ESI) Corporation to
process the application made by the Respondents-Writ Petitioners
for COVID-19 relief in terms of the Scheme announced by the
Appellants.
2. The stand of the ESI was that the guidelines provided for the
death occurring in a period of 45 days after testing positive for
COVID-19. It was argued that the ESI Corporation was bound by
its own Scheme and that Shri Nayak did not fall within the
parameters stipulated therein.
3. It was pointed out before the learned Single Judge that para
XI(I)(iii)(d) of the Notification dated 11th August, 2021 reads as
under:
"XI(I)(iii)(d). There may be cases of death even after
recovery from COVID-19 and discharge from hospital. In
such cases, if the death results within 30 days of recovery
and discharge from hospital, then the case shall be decided
on recommendation of a Medical Board. In cases where the
date of recovery from COVID-19 cannot be ascertained for
want of COVID-19 negative certificate, the Post COVID
death up to 45 days after testing COVID-19 Positive shall
be considered for relief under the scheme." (emphasis
supplied)
4. The learned Single Judge has taken note of the official
certificate issued which states that Shri Nayak died of COVID-19
on 20th June, 2021. Only because of the test report, which showed
that he had tested positive in respect of a sample collected on 16th
April 2021, was received on 13th October, 2021 which was beyond
the 45 days' period after 20th June 2021, ESI declined to entertain
the claim.
5. In para 12 of the impugned order, it has been held as under by
the learned Single Judge:
"12. It is clear that the contingency sought to be addressed
by the sub-clause was absence of negative certificate, after
having tested positive and before death, for the 45 days
period to take effect as eligibility criteria of entitlement to
relief under the scheme. This guideline is not applicable in
case of petitioners claiming the relief since, though there
was no negative certificate in respect of the deceased but
death of the deceased was officially certified as due to
COVID-19."
6. Having heard learned counsel for the Appellant, the Court is of
the view that the learned Single Judge has committed no error in
the analysis of the clauses of the Scheme and in the conclusion that
the rejection of the claim of the Respondents was bad in law.
7. There is no ground made out for interference. The writ appeal is
accordingly dismissed.
8. The impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge shall be
complied with by ESI within a period of four weeks from today.
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(G. Satapathy)
Judge
M. Panda/S.K. Guin
