Case at a Glance
The widow of an NDMC Beldar who died of COVID-19 on 31 May 2020 sought the ₹1 crore ex gratia announced by the Delhi Government’s Cabinet Decision No. 2835 of 13 May 2020. NDMC had paid her ₹15 lakh under its own scheme, given her compassionate appointment and released terminal dues, but said the ₹1 crore claim lay against the Delhi Government. The Delhi High Court dismissed her writ petition on the ground of unexplained delay and laches, holding that a June 2026 representation could not revive a 2020 claim. It also observed that the scheme covers only persons deployed for COVID-19 duties by the Delhi Government, and no duty roster, deployment order or certificate had been produced.
The petitioner’s husband had worked as a Beldar in the Civil Engineering Department of the New Delhi Municipal Council since 2010. He tested positive for COVID-19 on 28.05.2020, was admitted to Lok Nayak Hospital on 30.05.2020 and died on 31.05.2020. The petitioner claimed she had applied from 08.07.2020 for the ₹1 crore ex gratia under Cabinet Decision No. 2835 dated 13.05.2020, without any reply. According to the petition, in October 2022 NDMC paid ₹50,000 and ₹15,00,000 as compensation/welfare assistance, leave encashment of ₹2,30,021 and NPS benefits, and gave her compassionate appointment.
In June 2026 she sent a representation to the Chief Minister, the SDC (Revenue) and the NDMC Commissioner. NDMC replied on 24.07.2026 that ₹15 lakh had been released under its own office order and that the ₹1 crore claim, arising under a GNCTD scheme, was not maintainable against NDMC. With no decision from the Delhi Government, she filed a writ petition. The respondents argued unexplained delay of about six years and that there was no proof the deceased had been deployed for COVID-19 duties.
The Key Question Before the Court
Can a writ petition for COVID-19 ex gratia filed in 2026 for a death in May 2020 be entertained, and does NDMC’s payment under its own scheme prove eligibility under the Delhi Government’s ₹1 crore scheme?
Delay, and the difference between a COVID-era death and COVID duty
On delay, Justice Amit Mahajan noted that although no strict statutory limitation applies to writ petitions, “courts may reject petitions if they suffer from undue delay and laches”. Nothing on record showed the claim had been pursued between 2020 and 2026, and a representation made in June 2026, and NDMC’s reply to it, could not revive a stale claim or create a fresh cause of action. The Court held that a claim arising in May 2020 cannot be revived merely by a representation in June 2026, especially without any demonstrated earlier pursuit.
On merits, the Court observed that there was no rejection or approval order from the Delhi Government at all, and that the Cabinet Decision covers only persons “deployed for COVID-19 duties by Government of NCT of Delhi”. Dying during the pandemic is not, by itself, enough. NDMC’s ₹15 lakh payment was made by a different authority under a separate scheme and did not conclusively establish eligibility, and no duty roster, deployment order, certificate or departmental recommendation was produced. The Court relied on the Division Bench decision in Prem Wati & Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. (2026:DHC:6749-DB), which distinguished routine duties from COVID-19 duties and refused ex gratia where a Beldar was discharging routine work, observing that “Discharging routine duties, that may have been crucial to public welfare during the pandemic” is not the same as being deployed for COVID-19 duties.
What the Court Actually Held
- The writ petition is dismissed on the ground of unexplained delay and laches.
- A representation made in June 2026 cannot revive a claim that arose in May 2020 or create a fresh cause of action.
- Cabinet Decision No. 2835 extends the ₹1 crore ex gratia only to persons deployed for COVID-19 duties by the Delhi Government; a death during the pandemic is not sufficient.
- NDMC’s payment of ₹15 lakh under its own scheme does not by itself establish eligibility under the Delhi Government’s scheme.
Why This Judgment Matters
- Many families of municipal and government workers who died during the pandemic are still pursuing the Delhi Government’s ₹1 crore ex gratia; this ruling shows what they must prove.
- It applies the Division Bench line in Prem Wati that routine work during the pandemic is distinct from COVID-19 duty deployment.
- It is a reminder that writ remedies can be lost through delay even where there is no fixed limitation period.
What Should Advocates Take Away From the Judgment?
For Families of Deceased Workers
- Gather documentary proof of COVID-19 duty deployment: duty rosters, deployment orders, certificates or departmental recommendations.
- Do not rely only on compensation paid by the employer under a separate scheme.
- Pursue the claim promptly and keep copies of every application and reminder; gaps in pursuit can be fatal.
For Counsel
- Before filing, document continuous pursuit of the claim; a recent representation will not cure years of silence.
- Identify the correct authority under each scheme; NDMC treated the ₹1 crore claim as one against the Delhi Government.
- Engage with Prem Wati & Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi on the routine duties versus COVID duties distinction.
Key Takeaways
- The petition was dismissed for unexplained delay and laches.
- Belated representations do not revive stale claims.
- The ₹1 crore scheme requires deployment for COVID-19 duties by the Delhi Government.
- Employer payments under other schemes do not prove eligibility under this one.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is eligible for the Delhi Government’s ₹1 crore COVID-19 ex gratia?
As read by the Court, Cabinet Decision No. 2835 dated 13.05.2020 covers persons deployed for COVID-19 duties by the Government of NCT of Delhi. A death during the pandemic, without proof of such deployment, was held insufficient.
Is there a time limit for filing a writ petition for such a claim?
There is no strict statutory limitation, but the Court held that undue delay and laches can justify rejection, and dismissed a petition filed about six years after the death.
Did the widow receive anything?
According to the petition as recorded in the judgment, NDMC paid ₹50,000 and ₹15 lakh under its own scheme, released leave encashment and NPS benefits, and granted compassionate appointment. Only the ₹1 crore claim was before the Court.
Conclusion
The ruling turns mainly on delay, but its observations on eligibility will matter to every pending claim: the ₹1 crore ex gratia is tied to COVID-19 duty deployment, and that has to be shown through records, not inferred from the timing of the death or from another authority’s payment.
Practical takeaway: Families pursuing COVID-19 ex gratia should act quickly, address the claim to the correct authority, and build a documentary record of the deceased’s deployment for COVID-19 duties.
For more judgments, legal opinions and case analysis, visit courtkutchehry.com