Pranjal Sharma | Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad | 19th June 2020
Divya Gauba v. Union of India & Ors., W.P.(C) 3525/2020 & CM APPL. 12532/2020
FACTS
- The petitioner is a regular employee at Air India, on the post of Senior Assistant General Manager.
- By the virtue of order dated on 28.06.2017 the petitioner was transferred to Denmark for the post of manager for three years. On the 20th of May,2020 the petitioner was reposted back to India and was required to join Southern region, Chennai.
- The petitioner contends that she has been suffering from some serious health issues, making her Vulnerable and at a high risk of catching Corona during the flight or after landing and requests to keep the posting order in abeyance until things normalize.
- The defendant, i.e., Air India submits that currently the petitioner is relieved from her position in Denmark and therefore, can not seek stay of posting order.
- The defendant also states that her concern regarding her safe travel also has been addressed as,
- Air India is ready to provide a confirmed Business Class Ticket upto Chennai.
- The petitioner shall be provided with safety kit with a face shield, face mask, gloves, and a sanitizer as per the guidelines of Vande Bharat Mission.
- If the petitioner will have to undergo Institutional Quarantine as per the guidelines of Ministry of Health and Family Welfare of the state government, the cost of the same shall be reimbursed by Air India.
- The petitioner shall be entitled to transport her personal belongings upto 1,750 Kgs, free of cost.
- The petitioner shall be paid as per the TA/DA rules of the company.
ISSUES
- Whether suffering from health issues and fear of getting infected by COVID – 19 can be considered as a valid ground for non-acceptance of travelling back to job posting region.
The issue in current cases arises from the reluctance of petitioner to travel back to India as she has been reposted from Denmark by the reason of ill health and doubt of catching infection.
JUDGMENT
The court decided that the petitioner has made no ground for quashing of the posting order and any kind of transfer is an exigency of service that does not come under the domain of the court to interfere unless it is malafide or in violation of the transfer policy.
As none of the above stated two exceptions have been pleaded by the petitioner and as the petitioner’s posting that was of three years had come to an end, the court holds that she has no vested interest to continue in Denmark.
The court keeping in mind, all the necessary steps and allowances promised by by Air India for the safe travel of petitioner the court deemed it fit that the petitioner joins by 15th July of 2020.
Leave a Reply