GOVERNMENT REQUEST, NOT MANDATE: WEST BENGAL CLARIFIES YOGA DAY COMPULSION ALLEGATIONS BEFORE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
KOLKATA — In a clarification regarding state-sponsored mass wellness events, the Government of West Bengal informed the Calcutta High Court that its directive urging state employees to participate in International Yoga Day celebrations is a voluntary request, not a mandatory service obligation.
The submission was made before a Single-Judge Bench of Justice Amrita Sinha during the hearing of a writ petition filed by the State Coordination Committee of West Bengal Government Employees. The petitioners challenged an official circular issued by the Chief Secretary, alleging that departmental heads were weaponizing the directive to coerce employees into mandatory registration under threat of service repercussions.
Voluntary Attendance vs. Record Exploits
Appearing for the State, Additional Advocate General (AAG) Billwadal Bhattacharya vehemently denied the petitioners' claims of coercion. The AAG submitted that the government’s circular was intended as a motivational push rather than a binding administrative order. He clarified that no adverse or disciplinary action would be initiated against any government servant who chooses to abstain from the June 21 event.
When questioned by the Bench regarding the administrative intensity surrounding the event’s registration drive, the state’s counsel revealed an underlying promotional objective. The administration, the court was informed, aimed to mobilize a historic turnout to surpass a national milestone previously established by the State of Andhra Pradesh, which reportedly registered three crore participants in a single day during a prior iteration of the event.
Judicial Skepticism Over Administrative Competitions
Justice Sinha, while acknowledging the inherent value of fitness and stress management within public administration, expressed reservations regarding the competitive nature of the state's mobilization strategy.
"Promoting health and wellness among state employees is undoubtedly a healthy move. However, the administration should focus on the intrinsic benefits of the practice rather than engaging in statistical competitions to break records," the Bench observed.
The petitioners argued that treating a lifestyle or wellness event as an implicit condition of service violates standard statutory service rules. They contended that using bureaucratic channels to pressure staff into weekend or non-working-hour events constitutes an overreach of administrative authority, particularly when performance or attendance metrics are tied—even informally—to employee profiles.
Interim Protections and Next Steps
To safeguard employees against potential bureaucratic overzealousness, the AAG placed a formal statement on the record, affirming that the judicial forum remains open to any individual facing structural backlash. "If any employee faces consequential or discriminatory action for non-attendance, they are at liberty to approach this Court immediately," Bhattacharya stated.
Seeking to formalize these verbal assurances into a binding legal record, Justice Sinha declined to pass an immediate interim injunction but directed the State Government to obtain formal, written instructions clarifying its precise stance on employee autonomy for the event.
The Calcutta High Court has scheduled the matter for a follow-up hearing on Friday, where the state is expected to present its verified written submission confirming the non-compulsory nature of the participation drive.
Case Title: State Coordination Committee v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Jurisdiction: Calcutta High Court (Single Bench)
Discription: This formal legal news report covers a significant dispute before the Calcutta High Court regarding employee autonomy in state-sponsored events. The narrative centers on a writ petition filed by West Bengal government employees who accused departmental heads of turning a lifestyle directive for International Yoga Day into a compulsory obligation. In response, Additional Advocate General Billwadal Bhattacharya clarified before a Single-Judge Bench of Justice Amrita Sinha that the circular was a voluntary motivational push, not a binding mandate, driven by an ambitious administrative goal to surpass a massive participation record previously set by Andhra Pradesh. While acknowledging the benefits of workplace wellness, Justice Sinha criticized the government’s focus on statistical competitions. Ultimately, the court declined to issue an immediate injunction, opting instead to direct the state to submit a formal, verified written statement confirming that non-attendance will carry zero professional consequences.
