Himachal Pradesh High Court: Maternity Leave Is A Fundamental Rights; The Denial Of It Violates Article 29, 30 Of Constitution

he Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case State of HP Vs Sita Devi observed and has reiterated that every woman is being entitled to the maternity leave, irrespective of her employment status.
The bench comprising of Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Virender Singh in the case observed and has stated that the maternity leave aims to protect the dignity of motherhood and also to ensure the well-being of both the woman and her child.
The court observed that the respondent in the instant case being a daily wage woman employee at the time of advance pregnancy could not have been compelled to undertake hard labour, as the same would have been detrimental to not only to her health and safety but also to the child health, safety and growth. Therefore, the maternity leave being the fundamental right of the of the respondent and the court cannot deny the same. Thus, it has clearly been stated that the action of the petitioner is violative of Articles 29 and 39D of the Constitution of India.
As the Article 29 of the Constitution of Indian pertains to Protection of interests of minorities and Article 3(D) relates to adequate means of livelihood to all the citizens.
The court made the said observations while hearing the Sate’s plea against an order passed by the H.P. Administrative Tribunal, wherein the respondent in the case had been granted the benefit of deemed maternity leave and consequential benefit of conferment of work charge status on completion of 8 years’ service.
Further, the court observed that the respondent had taken maternity leave for three months after giving birth and due to her pregnancy and delivery in the year 1996, the respondent had only worked only 156 days instead of the required 240 days in a year.
It has also bene ruled by the Tribunal in the case the respondent’s maternity leave should be considered continuous service under Section 25(B)(1) of the Industrial Dispute Act.
The court aggrieved with the same filed the instant plea, wherein it is argued
that since there is no provision in the department for granting maternity leave to female daily wage worker, thus, the Tribunal could not have directed the petitioners to grant said relief. However, the court in the case observed and has held that denying maternity benefits to any woman, regardless of her employment status, would amount to a violation of the principles of equality that the Constitution so ardently champions. Thus, the bench also referred to the case Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Female Workers (Muster Roll) & Anr., wherein it has been held by the Apex Court that the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 entitled maternity leave even to women who is engaged on a casual basis or on muster roll basis daily wage and not only those in regular employment.
Accordingly, the court dismissed the plea.