Rajasthan High Court Upholds Single Judge Decision Granting Maternity Leave To Woman Who Gave Birth Prior To Joining Service

Upholding the decision of the Single Judge, a Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court has affirmed that a female government servant was entitled to avail maternity leave if she joins within the period of confinement i.e. 15 days before to three months after the birth of child, irrespective of the fact that the child was born prior to the date of joining or before issuance of appointment in service.

A Division Bench of Justices Vinit Kumar Mathur and Indrajit Mahanty rejected the argument of Additional Advocate General Pankaj Sharma that the respondent-mother was not a Government Servant at the time of delivery of the child, and therefore, would not be covered under Rule 103 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. It remarked,

The argument of the learned Additional Advocate General that Rule 103 of the Rules is applicable only to the serving Government servant is noted to be rejected for the reason that Rule 103 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 has a nexus with the object sought to be achieved by the legislature i.e. for facilitating the female to overcome the problems and issues at the time of the delivery. 

Background

The present petition was filed assailing the order of the Single Judge whereby it held that a female government servant is entitled to avail maternity leave if she joins within the period of confinement. Accordingly, the mother-respondent was allowed all consequential benefits.

Justice Dinesh Mehta had then observed that Rule 103 was employee-centric and that it has no nexus or with the date or event of childbirth in the case of a claim of maternity leave.

Submissions

AAG Sharma submitted before the Division Bench that maternity leave benefits could not be availed since the respondent delivered a child before the joining of her services. As per Rule 103 of the 1951 Rules, he submitted that a female government servant is entitled to maternity leave only if she is in service. 

He also submitted that the competent authorities of the concerned Department had rightly rejected the application of the respondent for grant of maternity leave and other consequential benefits.

On the other hand, Advocate Bhavit Sharma, appearing for the respondent, submitted that since it is beneficial legislation and it is a fact that the mother-respondent had delivered a child 19 days before the joining period, the benefit could not be denied to her.

Findings

Given that soon before the joining period, the respondent had delivered a child; the Court opined that it is undisputed that after the delivery of a child, the mother needs rest and a certain period for fulfilling the natal needs of the child.

"It is of common knowledge that if an employee who has delivered child needs some time to recover from the post delivery issues and to take care of the new born baby. It is precisely for this reason the legislature thought it proper to insert a provision in the shape of Rule 103 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. The view taken by the learned Single Judge thus, is quite natural and to give a complete meaning and purpose to the legislative intent so that the needs of a female employee are taken care of at the time of delivery of a child", the Bench said.

The Court also relied on the observations made the Kerala High Court in Mini K.T. v. Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India (2017), wherein it was held that,

"Motherhood is not an excuse in employment, but motherhood is a right which demands protection in given circumstances. The employer has to consider whether her duty attached to her mother prevented her from attending employment or not. As already adverted above, motherhood is an inherent dignity of woman, which cannot be compromised."

Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed for being bereft of merit.

Title: State of Rajasthan v. Smt. Neeraj 

Click Here To Download The Order 

Read The Order