In the recent ruling of Mr. Gopal Vittal, Bharti Airtel Ltd v. Mr. Kamtci Shankar Arumugam, the Madras High Court has distinguished between the right to privacy of an individual versus the safety rights of a larger group. In this case, the petitioner company wanted its employees to get vaccinated against Covid-19 and had arranged for free vaccination of all its employees. The respondent employee refused to take the Covid vaccine. The employer maintained a list of employees who did not get vaccinated and instructed those employees to wear a mask while in office or, otherwise, work from home. The employee accused the employer of failing to protect his sensitive personal data by putting his name on the list of employees who did not get vaccinated.

The Madras High Court ruled that an individual cannot be forced to be vaccinated. However, at the same time, an employer can take measures to ensure the welfare of the majority of its employees. The court took the view that the action of the petitioner company in preparing a list of employees who were not vaccinated and to follow-up with them regarding their vaccination status did not amount to a breach of Section 43A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (under which a failure to protect personal data can be penalized and compensation is payable), because this was an effort on the part of the company to safeguard others from Covid-19. This ruling clarifies that the right to keep safe the larger employee body supersedes an individual’s personal rights in such a situation.