High Court declines request of unvaccinated government school teacher to resume work

Stating that it is because of vaccination the number of cases of the novel coronavirus has gone down, the judge dismissed the interim relief application. 

The Delhi High Court has declined the plea filed by a Delhi government teacher, who chose to remain unvaccinated against COVID-19, to join her duty. The court declined interim relief to the teacher who was marked "on leave," saying that it was not inclined to interfere unless there was a medical issue, NDTV reported. Stating that being unvaccinated put everyone at risk, Justice Rekha Palli said, “I am not inclined. Why should she not get vaccinated? There is not a case for interim relief.” The court issued notice and sought the Delhi government's response on the teacher's challenge to the Department of Education's order restraining unvaccinated teachers from attending school from October 15.

The petition was opposed by Counsel Siddharth Krishna, who appeared for the Delhi government. He said that allowing the petitioner to start coming to school would put the students at risk. Senior lawyer Sanjoy Ghose, appearing for the teacher, stated that his client “does not want to expose her body to external substance” and presently, she has strong immunity as her antibody count was 427.

The Counsel also expressed that being unvaccinated is not a crime as vaccination is voluntary. It was also emphasised that there was nothing to show that mandatory vaccination prevented transmission of the virus. Urging the court to allow the petitioner to resume work, he stated that she was willing to undertake the COVID-19 test every month and practice COVID-appropriate behaviour.

Expressing that it is because of vaccination the number of cases of the novel coronavirus has gone down. The judge added, “Not at all. I will not touch that matter. I am not inclined at all unless there is a serious problem.”

The petitioner agreed to get herself vaccinated without prejudice to her rights and contentions but urged the authorities to “take responsibility for any short term or long term consequences”.

The application for interim relief has been dismissed by the court and clarified that merely because the petitioner is now willing to get vaccinated, it should not be seen as the court condoning the prior lapse. The court directed that the matter be listed along with another pending petition challenging the order.

Read More: