In a landmark judgment that reinforces the rights of working mothers, the Chhattisgarh High Court has decided that a contractual staff nurse cannot be denied maternity leave salary on the sole basis of her employment status. This decision by Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad highlights the constitutional principles of dignity and equality, confirming that maternity benefits are not the prerogative of permanent employees, and contractual employees cannot be denied maternity leave salary.
Background of the Case
Smt. Rakhi Verma, the petitioner, was working as a contractual staff nurse at the District Hospital in Kabirdham. She had applied for maternity leave from January 16, 2024, to July 16, 2024, which was accordingly approved by the competent authority. Following the birth of a girl child on January 21, 2024, she rejoined her duty on July 14, 2024.
In spite of the sanctioned leave and her return to work, Verma was denied maternity leave salary, particularly from March 17, 2024, to July 3, 2024. Being subject to financial hardship, she made several representations, including one to the Chief Health and Medical Officer, Kabirdham. However, she received no response. Consequently, she filed a writ petition seeking the release of her pending salary on the ground that that she cannot be denied maternity leave salary.
Court’s Observations and Ruling
Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, presiding over the case, emphasized that maternity benefits cannot be withheld merely because an employee is working on a contractual basis. The court stated, “Salary for the period when the petitioner had gone to maternity leave cannot be denied on the ground that she was serving as a contractual employee. Further considering the case that once the petitioner was granted maternity leave, the respondents are under an obligation to release the salary of the petitioner forthwith in respect of the period when she had gone for maternity leave.”
The court also noted that once the maternity leave is granted, the employer is obliged to release the salary for that period. Refusing such benefits undermines the dignity of women and the rights of the newborn child. The judgment emphasized that the right to life and dignity, as enshrined in the Constitution, applies to both the mother and the child, irrespective of the mother’s employment status. The court instructed the officials to process Verma’s claim for unpaid salary for the period from March 17, 2024, to July 13, 2024, within a period of three months.
Legal Framework and Precedents
The court’s decision is in alignment with Rule 38 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services Leave Rules, 2010, which provides for maternity leave benefits. It also in line with previous judgments that have endorsed the rights of contractual employees to maternity benefits. For example, in the case of Dr. Kavita Yadav vs. Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Department, the court regarded that the mother should not be denied maternity leave salary based on the nature of employment. In the case of Devshree Bandhe vs. Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited and others, the court held that the petitioner was entitled to maternity leave as provided in Rule 38 of the Rules of 2010, in accordance with law, and she cannot be denied maternity leave salary.
The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, is meant to protect the employment of women during maternity and entitles them to full paid leave from work to take care of the child. The Act does not distinguish between permanent and contractual employees, which reinforces the stance of the court in this case.
Implications of the Judgment
This ruling establishes a significant precedent, which ensures that contractual employees are not denied their rightful benefits. It highlights that the nature of employment should not be an obstacle to gaining access to maternity benefits, which are vital for the well-being of both the mother and the child.
Not agreeing with the decision that denied maternity leave salary to contractual staff, the court has reiterated the principles of equality and non-discrimination in the workplace. This decision is anticipated to guide employment policies and practices, encouraging employers to ensure compliance with the provision of maternity benefits for all employees, irrespective of their contractual status. Advocate Shrikant Kaushik argued on behalf of the petitioner, while Advocate General Prafull Bharat argued on behalf of the State and official respondents.
Conclusion
The Chhattisgarh High Court’s judgment marks a progressive step towards upholding the rights of working mothers who are denied maternity leave salary. It sends an unambiguous message that employment status should not decide access to fundamental benefits such as maternity leave salary. This decision provides relief to the petitioner and paves the way for more inclusive and equitable employment practices across the country so that working mothers are not denied maternity leave salary.
About Author
Ananda Murthy JS is an English teacher in Hyderabad. His teaching experience spans more than 30 years, which includes his stint as an IGCSE teacher in the Maldives, lecturer in English for Intermediate students, writer and editor/language specialist, and IELTS, GRE and TOEFL trainer. He also provides English coaching to students appearing for CAT, IELTS, GRE and TOEFL privately in Hyderabad. Ananda has proficiency in editing SWOT analyses, market forecast and other reports, conducting Effective English sessions, and imparting training in Business English. He also write business blogs, key word dense articles and original articles on various topics.