Beyond the Desk: High Court Limits Scope of Census Requisitions for LIC Employees

In a significant ruling that provides clarity on the limits of state power during national exercises, the Allahabad High Court has stayed a directive from the Nagar Nigam, Kanpur, which sought to engage Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) employees for Census 2027 duties.

A division bench comprising Justice Salil Kumar Rai and Justice Swarupama Chaturvedi intervened after the North Central Zone Insurance Employees Federation challenged a Single Judge’s dismissal of their writ petition. The core of the dispute lies in the interpretation of the Census Act, 1948, specifically whether the government has the authority to deploy private or quasi-public entity staff outside their professional premises for census-related tasks.

The Conflict: Jurisdiction vs. Administrative Necessity The Nagar Nigam had issued an order on May 5, 2026, requisitioning LIC employees for census work. The petitioner, representing the insurance staff, argued that the Zonal Officer acted without legal jurisdiction and in violation of the statutory framework governing the Census Act.

While the Single Judge initially dismissed the matter citing a failure to specifically challenge the requisition order and noting that such tasks are of public importance, the division bench took a different view. The bench emphasized that the legality of a state directive—regardless of the "national importance" of the objective—must be anchored in a specific statutory provision.

Defining the Boundaries of Section 7(c) The crux of the court’s legal analysis rests on Section 7(c) of the Census Act, 1948 . While the Act allows the government to call upon the staff of factories, firms, and establishments for assistance in census operations, the Court clarified a vital spatial limitation.

"A reading of Section 7(c) of the Census Act, 1948 shows that even though the State Government through its authorized officer may requisition the staff of any establishment, firm or factory for assistance in census operations but the same can only be for the purpose of census operations within the premises of such establishment and not outside the premises," the Court noted.

The bench held that the order passed by the Zonal Officer was prima facie inconsistent with this statutory limit, effectively distinguishing between "assistance" provided within the workplace and the sweeping requisition of staff for field-based census duties.

Key Observations The Court delivered a strong reminder that the importance of a government initiative does not override the necessity of statutory compliance:

  • On Legislative Compliance: "The legality of an order of any State authority is not dependent merely on the purpose of the order but also on whether the order complies with the statutory requirements."
  • On Statutory Interpretation: "The Zonal Manager, Kanpur, Nagar Nigam had no jurisdiction to requisition the employees of the Life Insurance Corporation under Section 4 of the Census Act, 1948 as requisitioned by his order dated 5.5.2026."
  • On Judicial Process: "The prayer in a writ petition is to be considered in light of the contents of the petition."

Implications for Future Operations The decision to stay the May 5, 2026 order provides immediate relief to the LIC employees and sets a critical precedent that civil authorities must adhere strictly to the spatial boundaries defined by the Census Act.

By prioritizing the statutory scope over the administrative convenience of the state, the High Court has reinforced the rights of employees against overreaching administrative mandates. As the matter moves to a final hearing on July 6, 2026, the case— North Central Zone Insurance Employees Federation vs Union Of India And 5 Others —serves as a reminder that even in the context of national exercises, every administrative action must be traceable to clear, written legal authority.