223 Employees Of Delhi Commission For Women Sacked: What We Know

Former Delhi Commission for Women (DCW) chief Swati Maliwal has once again emerged as a strong voice in the fight for women's rights, as she vehemently opposed Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena's recent decision to terminate the employment of 223 DCW employees, including women who are survivors of acid attacks.

Official Notice from the Lieutenant Governor's Office

A notice issued by Saxena's office on April 29 explained the rationale behind this decision. It highlighted that the actions of the DCW in appointing contractual staff went beyond the delegated powers and transgressed various procedures stipulated under the DCW Act, rules, regulations, and guidelines set forth by the Government of NCT of Delhi. The notice unequivocally conveyed the government's sanction for the cessation of services of all contractual staff with immediate effect.

Response from Former Delhi Commission for Women Chief

Swati Maliwal, erstwhile chief of the Delhi Commission for Women and currently a Rajya Sabha member representing the Aam Aadmi Party, swiftly reacted to the directive from the lieutenant governor's office. She characterized the move as a "Tughlaqi farmaan," drawing a historical parallel to the whimsical decree issued by the eighteenth Sultan of Delhi, Muhammad bin Tughluq, in 1327.

Maliwal, through a post on social media, articulated her concerns regarding the implications of the decision. She highlighted the precarious situation that would ensue if all contract staff were summarily removed, pointing out that the Women's Commission heavily relies on such personnel for its functioning

After one press conference by me, they have reduced the number of so called illegally appointed persons from 223 to 52! Is this the way government functions? Even by this calculation, only 38 staff shall remain in the Commission! How will Sahyogini, 181 women helpline, Rape… https://t.co/NhsuCw9woW

— Swati Maliwal (@SwatiJaiHind) May 2, 2024

Central to the controversy is the 223 individuals, among them survivors of heinous acid attacks, whose livelihoods hang in the balance due to the abrupt termination of their employment.  Throughout her tenure as the head of DCW and beyond, Swati Maliwal has been a staunch advocate for the empowerment of women, particularly those who have endured the trauma of acid attacks, by providing them with employment opportunities and avenues for rehabilitation. For these survivors, employment at the DCW represented not just a source of income but a symbol of hope and rehabilitation in the face of unimaginable adversity and trauma.

Furthermore, the directive reprimanded the DCW for adopting activities that could place further financial responsibilities on the government without prior consent from the finance department. Maliwal, who led the Delhi Commission for Women for nine years before becoming an AAP MP in the Rajya Sabha, was repeatedly told to seek approval from the finance department for the recruitment, according to the ruling. The position of chairperson for the women's panel is presently empty.

Saxena's decision to terminate the employment of DCW  staff has raised pertinent questions regarding adherence to legal frameworks and ethical considerations. Critics argue that the purported irregularities cited fail to justify the wholesale dismissal of dedicated employees, many of whom have contributed significantly to the commission's mandate of safeguarding women's rights. The absence of due process and transparency in this decision-making process further compounds concerns regarding accountability and fairness.

Legal Proceedings and Context

The backdrop against which this decision comes includes legal entanglements involving Maliwal and the Delhi Commission for Women. Earlier this year, the Delhi High Court intervened by staying the proceedings against Maliwal in a case lodged by the Delhi Police's Anti-Corruption Branch. The allegations revolved around purported irregularities in the appointments made during Maliwal's tenure as the head of the Delhi Commission for Women.

The High Court also stressed the absence of crucial elements constituting an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. It highlighted the lack of evidence implicating Maliwal in the acquisition of any "valuable thing or pecuniary advantage" through the contested appointments.