IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA
Sadhna Sahu – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India And Others –Respondents
Writ C No. - 20071 of 2024
Decided on : 23-07-2024
COVID-19 - Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Package - Article 226, Notifications dated 28.03.2020, 26.04.2021 - The court interpreted the provisions of the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Package, emphasizing that the scheme should be applied broadly to include all health workers at risk, not just those directly in COVID wards. The court highlighted the need for a liberal interpretation of welfare schemes, aligning with the principles of social justice and the directive principles of the Constitution. This interpretation influenced the court's decision to grant the petitioner the benefits of the scheme.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the rejection of her claim for benefits under the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Package following the death of her husband, a Ward Boy, due to COVID-19. The authorities argued that his death occurred after the coverage period and that he was not directly working in a COVID ward.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner’s husband was indeed at risk of contracting COVID-19 while working in the O.P.D., which was adjacent to the COVID section. The court rejected the narrow interpretation of the scheme by the authorities and emphasized the need for a broader understanding of the scheme's intent.
Issues: Whether the petitioner’s husband, as a Ward Boy in the O.P.D., was covered under the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Package despite not being directly assigned to a COVID ward, and whether the rejection of the claim was justified.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the scheme should be interpreted liberally to include all health workers who were at risk of exposure to COVID-19, regardless of their specific assignments. The court referenced previous judgments that supported a broad interpretation of welfare legislation.
Final Decision: The court quashed the impugned order rejecting the claim and directed the authorities to provide the petitioner with the ex-gratia payment under the scheme within three months.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Nishant Mishra and Sri Vinay Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri Sudarshan Singh, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 and learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondents No. 2 to 6.
2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the respondent no.6 under ‘Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Package : Insurance Scheme for Health Workers Fighting COVID-19’.
3. The grounds taken by the authorities are dual in nature. The first ground is that death of the petitioner’s husband took place subsequent to three months of the date 28.3.2020 and therefore, the same would not be covered by the Scheme. It is to be noted that the Scheme had been extended vide several notifications including the one bearing No. F.No.Z. 21020/16/2028-PH issued on April 26, 2021. By virtue of this notification it is clear that the Scheme was extended twice uptil 24.3.2021. Furthermore, the notification clarifies that the period shall continue for a period of 180 days w.e.f. 24.4.2021. Since the petitioner’s husband expired on 8.5.2021, he would be covered under the Scheme. The second reason given in the rejection order that the petitioner was not directly working in Covid ward but was a Ward Boy in the O.P.D. Department.
4. The beneficial schemes provided by the Government are not to be read in a technical manner and are required to be looked in a holistic manner. The relevant portion of the order dated 28.03.2020 is provided below:-
5. Upon perusal of the said paragraph, it appears that Health Workers who may be at risk of being impacted by COVID-19 including accidental loss of life on account of contracting COVID-19 would also be included in the same order.
6. Reliance may be placed on the Delhi High Court judgment in Sangeeta Wahi -v-Union of India and others, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine Del 6808. The ratio of the said judgment is provided below:-
Regl. Provident Fund Commr. v. Hooghly Mills Co. Ltd., (2012) 2 SCC 489
The definition of health workers under welfare schemes must be interpreted broadly to include all staff in direct contact with patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The main legal principle established is the interpretation of the Scheme to provide financial assistance to health workers who lost their lives on account of Covid-19 related duties, widening the def....
The court upheld that claims under the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Package necessitate strict compliance with eligibility and documentation requirements, failure of which results in dismissal.
The court established that a liberal interpretation of insurance benefits for frontline workers is necessary to uphold justice and societal gratitude, even when technical cut-off dates may suggest ot....
Court emphasizes liberal interpretation of welfare-oriented schemes to support families of frontline workers who died due to COVID-19.
Private practice of hospital not entitled for compensation under the Mantri Garib Kalyan Package
(1) Ex-gratia monetary compensation to families of Covid-19 Victims – Scope of judicial review on policy decisions having financial implications which might affect economy of country and which may al....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.