High Court stays strike by PGIMER employees, allows coercive action against strikers
PTC News Desk: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ordered the striking hospital and sanitation attendants, as well as housekeeping staff at the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), to return to work immediately. The order came as the court underlined the critical nature of hospital services.
The Bench further authorised the Chandigarh Administration and the PGI to use all legally available coercive measures, including enforcing the East Punjab Essential Services Maintenance Act of 1947, if the workers continued to abstain from their duties.
Notably, PGI filed a PIL in Punjab and Haryana High Court against the Union of India and other respondents amid a workers’ strike that began on October 10.
The Bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Anil Kshetarpal noted that the current strike has significantly impacted administration and hygiene at the PGI, one of the country's best medical institutes. The Bench stated that "the hygiene and sanitation of the institute-hospital has been put in jeopardy."
Counsel for the UT Chandigarh Administration told the court of the applicability of the 1947 Act, which includes a penalty provision for strikes in critical services. Citing previous implementation of the Act, counsel claimed that "the penal provisions of the Act of 1947 can very well be enforced, as was done earlier on January 4, 1968."
The court ruled that there was "no reason as to why UT, Chandigarh Administration, cannot invoke the rigours of the 1947 Act for maintaining and facilitating the hospital services in PGIMER."
One of the respondents, who appeared in person, also informed the court that the workers' grievances involved unaddressed service issues with the contractor responsible for their employment.
However, the Bench stressed that unresolved service grievances did not justify the workers' decision to leave their duties in a critical healthcare facility.
"The pendency of any service dispute cannot become a cause for an employee to abstain from work in a hospital, which is an essential service," the court said.
- With inputs from our correspondent
