Surprised That Govt Which Announced 'Mahila Samman Yojna' Has Appealed Against Granting Maternity Benefits To Young Woman: Delhi HC Imposes ₹50K Costs

The Delhi High Court has expressed surprise over the Delhi Government's decision to file a “misconceived appeal” challenging a single judge order which granted maternity and medical benefits to a young woman.

A division bench of Justice Rekha Palika and Justice Shalinder Kaur took note of the Delhi Government's steps to promote the interest of women in the city, including the recently announced Mukhyamanti Samman Yojna Scheme of giving Rs. 1000 to all adult women.

“…we are surprised that the Govt. of NCT of Delhi, which is giving great publicity to the steps being taken to promote the interest of women in Delhi and has under its recently announced scheme i.e., Mukhyamantri Mahila Samman Yojna promised to pay all adult women in the city except those who are tax-payers/government employees or are drawing pension, a monthly sum of Rs.1,000/- in the future has chosen to file such a misconceived appeal to assail an order which grants the benefits under the Act to a young woman, who has with utmost dedication served in the Delhi State Consumer Forum over 5 years,” the court said.

The bench dismissed the appeal moved by the Delhi Government challenging the single judge order which directed the authorities to grant maternity benefits to the woman for 26 weeks on account of her pregnancy as per the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.

The Delhi Government had initially sought time to obtain instructions on whether in light of the Mukhyamantri Mahila Samman Yojna, it would still want to press the appeal. The government responded positively.

Dismissing the plea with Rs. 50,000 costs due to being wholly misconceived, the court observed that even women working on a contractual basis are entitled to be granted the benefits under the Act even if these benefits exceed the duration of their contractual engagement.

“We, therefore, find no merit in the appellant's plea that the respondent was not entitled to receive any benefits under the Act for the period beyond 31.03.2018, the date when the term of her contractual engagement was expiring,” the court said.

Counsel for Appellant: Mr.Yeeshu Jain, ASC, GNCTD with Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Ms.Manisha & Mr.Hitanshu Mishra, Advs

Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Syed Hasan Isfahani and Mr. Syed Mohd. Hassan, Advs

Title: GOVT. NCT OF DELHI THROUGH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AND ORS v. REHMAT FATIMA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 299

Click Here To Read Order