Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

Delhi High Court Upholds MCD's Mandatory SMART App Attendance Policy: A Move to Instill Discipline in Healthcare Sector

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment pronounced, the Delhi High Court, led by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, upheld the mandatory implementation of the MCD SMART App for marking attendance in the healthcare sector. This decision came as a response to a petition filed by the Paramedical Technical Staff Welfare Association of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), challenging the introduction of the app-based attendance system.

Justice Singh, in his detailed judgment, emphasized the critical nature of discipline in the healthcare sector, stating, "The primary objective of this application is to inculcate a sense of discipline in employees, which is essential considering that their nature of work is highly patient-centric."

The court meticulously addressed concerns surrounding the right to privacy and the financial burden of mandatory smartphone ownership. It was noted that the MCD SMART App, developed by the National Informatics Centre, underwent thorough security audits, thus dismissing concerns over privacy risks. Justice Singh remarked, "As there is no apparent risk to the privacy of the employees, this Court does not find it necessary to delve into an analysis of where the right to privacy stands vis-à-vis the public duty of employees."

Addressing the financial concerns, the court highlighted that employees are not compelled to own smartphones, as attendance can be marked through alternative methods. The judgment stated, "Employees have alternate methods to mark their attendance and can opt to mark themselves present either through the supervisor or any other employee’s phone."

The decision has been welcomed by healthcare administrators, who view it as a progressive step towards ensuring accountability and efficiency in the public healthcare system. The court, in its analysis, drew parallels with similar systems in other states, underscoring the nationwide trend towards technology-enhanced transparency in public services.

Critics of the policy, however, maintain reservations about the implementation process and the broader implications for employee rights. Despite this, the court's ruling stands as a definitive statement on the balance between employee rights and the imperative of efficient public service delivery in the healthcare sector.

Date of Decision: 20th December 2023

PARAMEDICAL TECHNICAL STAFF WELFARE  ASSOCIATION OF MCD VS  GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

 

Latest Legal News