On Monday, the Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal of a DU professor filed against order refusing to interfere with the deduction of a day's salary towards contribution to the PM CARES Fund in wake of COVID-19 pandemic.

The Court remraked during the hearing that it is constrained to ask itself a question that wouldn’t a ‘stone hearted person’ only challenge the decision to deduct one day’s salary for a pandemic?

The petitioner Professor had filed a writ petition against the deduction of a day's salary worth ₹7,500 towards the PM CARES Fund on the ground that the University didn't give adequate notice of the deduction to their employees.

He contended that the University proceeded to deduct a day’s salary even in respect of those employees who didn't want to make a contribution. He stressed in the submission that voluntary contributions couldn't be taken out without consent.

Hearing on the submissions, the Court observed that the Chairman, UGC, as well as Registrar of the University, had made appeals  for voluntary contributions in the month of March 2020 to combat COVID-19. Last date to raise objections was set to be April 2, 2020.

The Court took judicial notice of the fact that we live in the ‘internet age’ where everyone is active on social media and prima facie opined that it was difficult to believe that the Appellant who lived in the University campus didn't know, via any means, about the appeals issued by the Chairman, UGC or by the Registrar, Delhi University.

The Court noted:

"At the highest, the issues of notice and consent are disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated in a writ petition.      Further, keeping in view the severity and the spread of the pandemic, the deduction of one day’s salary of the appellant (i.e. Rs.7,500/-) cannot be said to be contrary to public interest or harsh or inequitable. This Court is constrained to ask itself a question that wouldn’t a ‘stone hearted person’ only challenge the decision to deduct one day’s salary for a pandemic?"

 The Court observed that a it is settled law that a writ petition is not a statutory proceeding and a Court is not bound to entertain and allow the same if the cause espoused by the petitioner is contrary to public interest and/or inequitable – as is the case in the present matter.

The appeal was thu accordingly dismissed while the Court did grant the appellant liberty to file a suit for recovery.

The order has been passed by bench comprising of Justice Manmohan and  Justice Sanjeev Narula on 16-06-2020.

Read Order Here:

Share this Document :

Picture Source :