Granting Bail Does Not Shield Foreign Nationals from Executive Action on Visa Violations: Delhi High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Misused to Resolve Substantive Disputes or Replace Execution Mechanisms: P&H High Court Eviction Proceedings Must Follow Principles of Natural Justice: Telangana High Court Quashes Eviction Order under Senior Citizens Act Limitation Law | Sufficient Cause Cannot Be Liberally Interpreted If Negligence or Inaction Is Apparent: Gujarat High Court Mere Pendency of Lease Renewal Requests Does Not Constitute Bona Fide Dispute: Calcutta High Court Upholds Eviction Proceedings Under Public Premises Act CGST | Declaratory Nature of Safari Retreats Ruling Mandates Reassessment of Input Tax Credit Claims: Kerala High Court Changing Rules of the Game Mid-Way Violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution: Rajasthan High Court Disapproval of a Relationship Does Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide Without Direct Instigation or Mens Rea: Supreme Court Limitation Period Under Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicle Act Cannot Defeat Victim’s Right to Compensation: Gujarat High Court Maintenance To Wife Cannot Be a Precondition for Bail: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 438 CrPC Court Cannot Rewrite Contract When Vendor Lacks Ownership of the Property: Calcutta High Court Dismisses Appeal for Specific Performance Royalty Can Be Levied on Minor Minerals Like Brick Earth, Irrespective of Land Ownership: Supreme Court Bail in Heinous Crimes Must Be Granted with Adequate Reasons and Judicial Scrutiny: Supreme Court Judicial Review in Disciplinary Cases Is Limited to Fairness, Not Reappreciation of Evidence: Supreme Court Prolonged Consensual Relationship Cannot Be Criminalized as Rape on False Promise of Marriage: Madras High Court No Interference in Judgments Without Perversity or Legal Error Under Section 100 CPC: Andhra Pradesh HC

Himachal Pradesh High Court: Maternity Leave a Fundamental Right for All Female Employees”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Shimla, 12th June 2023: In a significant ruling, the Himachal Pradesh High Court, comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, has declared maternity leave as a fundamental right for all female employees, including those on daily wage, contractual, ad hoc, permanent, and temporary basis. The court emphasized that denying maternity leave to any category of female employees is violative of their constitutional rights and principles of social justice.

In the case of State of H.P. & Ors. Vs. Sita Devi, the court upheld the right to maternity leave under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, recognizing the significance of motherhood and the right to a dignified life for women in the workplace. The judgment stated, “Right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India includes the right to motherhood, and to become a mother is the most natural phenomenon in the life of a woman.”

The court referred to various international covenants and treaties, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), to highlight India’s obligation to provide maternity benefits to working women. It noted that maternity leave is a matter of social justice and gender equality.

Furthermore, the court pointed out that the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, applies to all female employees, irrespective of their employment status, and granting maternity leave to casual and daily wage workers is essential to ensure equal treatment for women in the workforce.

“The claim for maternity leave is founded on grounds of fair play and social justice. Women who constitute almost half of our society have to be honored and treated with dignity at places where they work to earn their livelihood,” the court remarked, reaffirming the importance of maternity leave as a fundamental human right.

The judgment has far-reaching implications and has quashed the office memorandum and circular that restricted maternity leave for certain categories of female employees. The court unequivocally stated that female employees, regardless of their employment status, are entitled to maternity leave at par with regular employees.

This landmark judgment sets a precedent for other courts in the country and reinforces the protection of women’s rights, dignity, and health during pregnancy. It reiterates the obligation of the State to ensure just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief for all female employees.

The ruling has been hailed by women’s rights advocates and is being seen as a significant step towards gender equality and women empowerment in the workforce.

Date of Decision: 25 July, 2023

State of H.P. & Ors.   vs Sita Devi    

Similar News