HC: Unjust to differentiate frontline civic workers with regular employees

The plea sought a daily allowance and insurance for 6,277 essential services’ workers, including 3,261 engaged in solid waste management, road cleaning and day-to-day transportation of garbage. (Express File Photo: Amit Chakravarty)

Observing that frontline contractual workers of the civic body on COVID-19 duty are equally “fulfilling their responsibilities by risking their lives” and it would be “extremely unfair and unjust” to differentiate them with regular employees, the Bombay High Court granted interim relief to thousands of contractual workers of Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) and asked the authority to pay certified workers a special daily allowance of Rs. 300 which is being paid to regular employees and officers.

A single judge bench of Justice S J Kathawalla on Wednesday passed an interim order through video-conference, while hearing a writ petition filed by Samaj Samata Kamgar Sangh, a body of sanitation and health workers of NMMC. The plea filed through advocates Bhavesh Parmar, Rahul Gaikwad and Nikita Abhyankar sought a daily allowance and insurance for 6,277 essential services’ workers, including 3,261 engaged in solid waste management, road cleaning and day-to-day transportation of garbage.

The HC had earlier asked advocate Sandeep Marne for NMMC to specify as to why a daily allowance of Rs 300 was not given to the contractual workers on COVID-19 duty. Marne had submitted that since the workers are employed by contractors, they are not entitled to the allowance which the corporation pays to its officers and workers.

Justifying its position, the NMMC further said that contractual workers are provided transportation and are receiving a salary of nearly Rs. 20,000 per month and they are working only for four hours a day instead of eight hours since the solid waste and garbage generated on roads has reduced due to lockdown. With reducing revenues, payment of allowance will create additional burden and that the workers from other civic bodies would also demand same benefit, NMMC argued. It also submitted that costs should also be borne by contractors who earn profits even during lockdown. Moreover, it was submitted that all contractual workers as claimed by the petitioner are not carrying out COVID-19 duties.

After hearing submissions, Justice Kathawalla pulled up the civic body and said that its stand was unfair as contractual workers involved in COVID-19 related duties are facing the same difficulties as those faced by other employees and officers and are “fulfilling their responsibilities by risking their lives”.

Justice Kathawalla noted in the order, “In my view, the risk taken by the employees and workers in carrying out COVID- 19 related duties for the corporation cannot be differentiated or distinguished on their employment being directly with the corporation or through the contractors.”

The judge added, “In so distinguishing between its own employees and the kamgaars, the corporation is seen to be making a tacit statement, that the kamgaars though discharging the COVID related duties as the corporation’s own employees, are either not ‘risking their lives’, or despite doing so, need to be paid differently only due to their employer being the contractor and not the corporation. To say the least, this would be an extremely unfair and unjust yardstick to use, to value human lives differently.”

In its interim order, the court asked the civic body to certify names of contractual workers involved in COVID-19 related duties within week and directed to pay special daily allowance to certified workers as per their attendance.

Moreover, the Centre through Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh had informed HC that the Rs 50 lakh insurance cover under Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana can be extended to contractual civic workers, involved in essential services, but only those who may come in direct contact with Covid-19 patients.

To this, the NMMC submitted that it would certify insurance claims for all contractual workers with healthcare facilities, irrespective of their numbers, provided they are in direct contact or care of COVID-19 patients.

Accepting NMMC’s statement, the court posted further hearing on June 12.