Delhi HC seeks city govt’s response on PIL alleging job posts with salaries below fixed min wage

The PIL was filed by Md Imran Ahmad, a law student of Jamia Millia Islamia, who said he filed it for the benefit of the workers and labourers working in Delhi

PGurus Newsdesk

February 14, 2023

The PIL was filed by Md Imran Ahmad, a law student of Jamia Millia Islamia, who said he filed it for the benefit of the workers and labourers working in Delhi

Delhi HC asks for city Govt’s stand on job postings on its website being advertised below minimum wages

On Tuesday the Delhi High Court sought the Arvind Kejriwal-led Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government to file a response to a plea seeking an “immediate” stop to putting up job vacancies with salaries below the prescribed or fixed minimum wage on its official portal or otherwise.

A plea filed in a form of Public Interest Litigation (PIL), was dealt with by a division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad.

The PIL seeking implementation of labor laws with the termination of bonded labor in the city on the basis of an order issued by the city government regarding minimum wages to be paid to unskilled, semi-skilled, and skilled workers, with effect from October 1, 2022, has been filed by a Jamia Millia Islamia University student of the law department.

Petitioner Imran Ahmad in the PIL said he has filed the case for the welfare of laborers working in the national capital.

The plea has sought the court’s direction to the city government to keep a tab on the payment made to all such employees through online means and to ensure that they get the right amount.

Ahmad has contended that mentioning salaries below fixed minimum wages for job posts like office boy, cook, waiter, delivery boy, computer operator, ambulance driver, kitchen helper, peon, etc., violates the order by adversely affecting the right to life (including the right to health and the right to dignity) as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

Ahmad’s plea stated: “It is because a person who does not have the minimum amount of money as decided by the government may not be in a position to buy and eat healthy food and avail other basic necessities such as clothes, accommodation, and internet.”

The bench, however, asked the counsel representing the government to obtain instructions. The matter has been listed to continue on May 23.

[With Inputs from IANS]

PGurus is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with all the latest news and views

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.