The decision of the Delhi High Court to validate the Municipal Corporation of Delhi’s (MCD) directive on attendance marking through a mobile application for its two hospitals has been upheld, emphasizing its importance in enhancing the healthcare system, fostering discipline, and ensuring accountability among employees.
In a recent order, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh rejected the petition filed by the Paramedical Technical Staff Welfare Association challenging the policy.
Justice Singh dismissed the petitioner’s claim that the new attendance system violated the right to privacy, stating that the application’s implementation is intricately connected to the initiative of instilling discipline and ensuring accountability among employees.
The court asserted that the introduction of the mobile application is a strategic and necessary step toward fortifying the healthcare system, and it cannot be deemed illegal since it serves the broader public interest.
The petitioner sought to quash an August 2022 order of the MCD, which linked the release of salaries for employees, including members of the petitioner association, to their daily attendance marking through the MCD SMART App.
The court noted that the mobile app-based attendance system does not compel poor employees to purchase smartphones, as alternative methods for marking attendance are available through supervisors or other employees’ phones.
Addressing concerns about privacy and security, the court emphasized that the application was developed by a body under the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, following due diligence to mitigate security threats.
The court’s power to interfere in executive policy decisions is limited to cases of arbitrary or unfair conduct, and in this instance, the decision was deemed rooted in broader public interest, especially concerning public health.
The court stressed that employees should align with measures aimed at enhancing hospital administration, emphasizing the inherent linkage between compliance and the smooth functioning of essential public services.
The introduction of such systems, aimed at ensuring transparency and efficiency in state departments, aligns with the objective of timely delivery of services and welfare schemes to the public.
The court observed that other states, such as Jharkhand and Andhra Pradesh, have also introduced similar practices for marking government employees’ attendance.
Regarding the significance of a healthcare system run by public authorities, the court noted that the absence of workers entrusted to run it could hinder the effective functioning of the entire system.
The decision underscores the court’s recognition of the essential role played by such attendance systems in supporting the transparency, efficiency, and overall effectiveness of public services.
In a related context, the court emphasized that the public sector has benefited significantly from technological advancements.
It stated that opposition to such advancements by employees demonstrates an unwillingness to comply with MCD orders.
Additionally, the court highlighted that public servants, upon accepting appointment, declare their commitment to abide by service rules and government-imposed conditions for better administration.
