E-Paper
Kerala HC refuses to stay ordinance on ‘salary cut’
The Kerala government told HC that the ordinance was within its rights and the framework of law
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday refused to stay the ordinance to defer one-month’s salary of state government employees, to be deducted in five instalments, to meet the expenses of the ongoing fight against coronavirus pandemic.
The court agreed to government’s contention that it has the legislative powers to bring such an ordinance during the extraordinary situation and posted it for further hearing on June 4. The government had brought the ordinance on April 30 after a single bench of the High Court had annulled its order to cut salaries of employees.
While hearing a bunch of petitions questioning the ordinance, the government said it was not a salary cut but a temporary deferment of payment to tide over the crisis. It reiterated that this amount will be paid once the fiscal condition of the state improves.
“It is an extra ordinary situation and the court cannot question the wisdom of the legislature in bringing out an ordinance, especially, when the ordinance does not partake of a character appropriating the salary but deferring it for the time being, that too under the authority of law,” it observed.
The government has lauded the order. “We are happy. As the court pointed out, it is an extraordinary situation. Instead of a united stance, some people are instigating employees,” said finance minister T M Thomas Iaasc. The state is expected to collect Rs 2000 crore through this move. But employees’ organisations owing allegiance to the opposition parties said they will move the Supreme Court soon.
The HT Guide to Coronavirus COVID-19
Last month the government had issued an order to cut a month’s salary in five instalments and said the move will be applicable to employees of all state-owned enterprises, public sector undertakings, quasi-government organisations and universities, among others. But later, its order was stayed by the High Court and the government was forced to take the ordinance route. The ordinance, however, left the salaries of employees of court and judicial services out of its purview.
