Unexplained six-year delay and laches bar a COVID-19 ex gratia compensation claim.

The petitioner, widow of Late Shri Nitin, sought release of ₹1 crore under Cabinet Decision No. 2835 dated 13 May 2020, as amended by Cabinet Decision No. 3065 dated 31 January 2022, on the ground that her husband, a Beldar in the Civil Engineering Department of the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC), contracted COVID-19 and died on 31 May 2020 while performing his duties.

The petitioner relied on the fact that NDMC had paid her ₹50,000 and ₹15 lakh as compensation/welfare assistance, released leave encashment and NPS benefits, and provided compassionate appointment.

The petitioner asserted that she had pursued the claim and submitted a formal representation on 23 June 2026. NDMC rejected the claim for an additional ₹1 crore, stating that it had already paid ₹15 lakh under its own COVID-19 compensation policy and that the ₹1 crore scheme was a GNCTD scheme.

The petitioner thereafter approached the High Court, contending that GNCTD had not decided her claim. The respondents opposed the petition on the grounds of unexplained delay and laches and failure to establish that the deceased had been specifically deployed for COVID-19 duties.

Whether the writ petition was liable to be rejected on the ground of unexplained delay and laches, where the death occurred in May 2020 but the relied-upon representation was made only in June 2026?

Whether the petitioner established eligibility for ₹1 crore under Cabinet Decision No. 2835 by showing that the deceased had been deployed for COVID-19 duties and contracted the disease while discharging such duties?

Whether the payment of ₹15 lakh by NDMC under its separate COVID-19 compensation policy conclusively established eligibility under the distinct GNCTD scheme?

The Court applied the principles governing judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution, including the doctrine of delay and laches, under which a writ court may refuse relief where a claim is not brought within a reasonable time, even in the absence of a statutory limitation period.

It held that a subsequent representation cannot revive a stale claim or create a fresh cause of action.

The Court interpreted Cabinet Decision No. 2835 as conferring the ₹1 crore ex gratia benefit only where the deceased was specifically “deployed for COVID-19 duties by Government of NCT of Delhi,” contracted the disease during the discharge of those duties, and the concerned department submitted the prescribed recommendation and supporting records.

It further applied the distinction between routine duties and specifically assigned COVID-19 duties recognised in Prem Wati & Ors. v. Govt. of NCT & Ors., 2026:DHC:6749-DB, holding that performance of routine duties during the pandemic does not by itself satisfy the scheme’s eligibility requirements.

The Court found that the deceased died on 31 May 2020, whereas the first material representation relied upon by the petitioner was dated 23 June 2026. No contemporaneous application, recommendation, deployment order, or other record demonstrated that the claim had been pursued during the intervening period; consequently, the six-year delay remained unexplained.

NDMC’s letter dated 24 July 2026 did not revive the claim because it merely clarified that the ₹15 lakh payment arose under NDMC’s separate policy and that the ₹1 crore claim related to GNCTD.

On merits, the Court held that the two schemes were distinct and that payment under NDMC’s policy could not be treated as conclusive proof of eligibility under Cabinet Decision No. 2835.

The petitioner produced no duty roster, deployment order, COVID-duty certificate, departmental recommendation, or equivalent contemporaneous material showing that the deceased had been specifically deployed for COVID-19 duties; describing him as a Beldar performing routine duties was insufficient.

Although the Court considered the merits, it held that the more fundamental defect was the unexplained delay and laches.

It also found that the petitioner had not established the distinct eligibility requirements under Cabinet Decision No. 2835, particularly deployment for COVID-19 duties.

The writ petition and all pending applications were accordingly disposed of.