/newsdrum-in/media/agency_attachments/2025/01/29/2025-01-29t072616888z-nd_logo_white-200-niraj-sharma.jpg){kind=logo}
/newsdrum-in/media/member_avatars/9Rj3p38eDEeibqzKtTLR.jpg )
Follow Us/newsdrum-in/media/media_files/2025/11/22/delhi-pollution-delhi-traffic-air-quality-aqi-delhi-winters-delhi-weather-2025-11-22-15-16-01.jpg)
Vehicles ply on a road amid smog as air quality remains in the 'poor' category, near Kartavya Path in New Delhi
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea by a senior-level scientist, working with an organisation funded by the central government, that he be allowed to work from home due to poor air quality on office premises.
The high court said the contention of the petitioner that he is entitled to work from home in terms of the GRAP guidelines is "misplaced" as a perusal of it revealed that it vests a discretionary and not a mandatory obligation upon the central government to take an appropriate decision for permitting its employees to avail the work from home facility.
In view of medical exigencies cited by the petitioner, the court said that in case his health condition so warrants, he should be at liberty to request his employer for being transferred out of Delhi.
The employer should make an endeavour to favourably consider the request, it said.
"The objective behind the implementation of GRAP cannot be construed as to create an enforceable personal right upon individual employees.
"It rather confers an obligation upon institutions/authorities/citizens to adhere to and support in maximising, as far as practicable and feasible, the implementation of the pollution-mitigating solutions stipulated thereunder," Justice Sachin Datta said in an order passed on December 9.
The petitioner is a 'Scientist-E' with the Centre for Development of Telematics (C-DOT) and sought work from home, citing hazardous air quality and respiratory issues.
He said the authorities should be directed to immediately ensure compliance with all Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP) orders issued by the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) in his office premises.
He sought directions for the inspection of the premises by competent authorities.
The plea sought permission for the petitioner to work from home until the office authorities are able to certify that the air quality is within the permissible range for the indoor environment.
He claimed that the doctor advised him to "avoid dust and smoke exposure".
The court said there is no occasion for issuance of a mandamus for effectively altering applicable service conditions in the guise of compliance with GRAP orders.
It dismissed the petition, saying there is no merit in it.