Latest news with #FundamentalRule101
Indian Express
28-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Reproductive rights, population control, and more: What Supreme Court said on maternity leaves in recent ruling
Written by Rishu Jaiswal The Supreme Court passed a significant ruling on May 23 allowing 'maternity benefit' to a Tamil Nadu-based teacher for her third child under Fundamental Rule 101 (a). The woman — an English teacher at a government higher secondary school — sought relief after her plea was rejected by the Madras High Court. Fundamental Rule 101(a), pertaining to the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 1961, addresses the eligibility criteria for maternity leave of state government servants in India. Here's what the Supreme Court said: # The apex court set aside the judgment declining maternity leave to the school teacher, and said she was entitled to receive maternity benefits despite having two children. # Maternity leave is integral to maternity benefits and reproductive rights are now recognised as part of international human rights law like right to health, privacy, equality and non-discrimination and dignity, remarked the Supreme Court. While hearing the matter, a division bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan disagreed with the findings of the Madras HC and said, 'Thus, as can be seen…, through various international conventions, the world community has recognized the broad spectrum of reproductive rights which includes maternity benefits.' # Emphasising on the Article 21 of the Constitution, the top court bench said, 'By judicial interpretation, it has been held that life under Article 21 means life in its fullest sense; all that which makes life more meaningful, worth living like a human being. Right to life includes all the finer graces of human civilization, thus rendering this fundamental right a repository of various human rights. Right to life also includes the right to health. Right to live with human dignity and the right to privacy are now acknowledged facets of Article 21.' # The Supreme Court also noted that the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017, does not bar maternity leave for women with more than two children, and only limits the duration of leave — 26 weeks for those with up to two children, and 12 weeks for those with more. It said that maternity leave itself is not denied based on the number of children. # The court also acknowledged the importance of population control measures, and said, 'Population control and reproductive rights are not mutually exclusive goals. They must be reconciled in a rational, humane manner.' A timeline of the case in SC The woman started working as an English teacher at a government higher secondary school in Tamil Nadu's Dharmapuri district in 2012. She had two children from her first marriage, which ended in a divorce in 2017. The kids are in the custody of her former husband. After marrying again in 2018, she became pregnant in 2021 and applied for maternity leave from August 17, 2021, to May 13, 2022, covering both pre- and post-natal periods. Her application for leave was rejected, and she subsequently filed a case in the high court. Initially, the case went to a single-judge bench who ruled in her favour and ordered the government organisation to grant her maternity leave. However, the state government challenged the decision, and a division bench of the HC reversed the decision, prompting the woman to approach the apex court. — with inputs from PTI Rishu Jaiswal is an intern with
Hindustan Times
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Maternity leave part of woman's rights: Top court
New Delhi Maternity leave is integral to maternity benefits and reproductive rights are now recognised as part of international human rights law like right to health, privacy, equality and non-discrimination and dignity, the Supreme Court said on Friday. Setting aside a Madras high court judgment declining maternity leave to a Tamil Nadu government school teacher , the top court ruled that a woman is entitled to maternity benefits for her third biological child, observing that the laudable object of population control of the state that restricts maternity leave for up to two children should be read harmoniously with the beneficial law under the Maternity Benefits Act. 'Maternity leave is integral to maternity benefits. Reproductive rights are now recognized as part of several intersecting domains of international human rights law viz. the right to health, right to privacy, right to equality and non-discrimination and the right to dignity,' a bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan said. Writing the judgment for the bench, justice Bhuyan noted the peculiar facts of the case where the petitioner got married to her first husband in 2006 and from the wedlock had two children. After the birth of the second child she joined service at a government school in December 2012. However, the marriage got dissolved in 2017 and both the children were in the custody of her former husband. In September 2018 she re-married and from the marriage, conceived a child and applied for maternity leave The government on August 28, 2021 rejected her request citing Fundamental Rule 101(a) applicable to state government employees of Tamil Nadu, which provides that maternity leave is available to women state government employees having less than two surviving children. It did not provide for grant of maternity leave for the third child on account of her re-marriage. The bench said, 'It is true that appellant has two biological children out of her first wedlock. But that was before entry into her service. Post entry into service and from her subsisting marriage, this is her first child.' Addressing the state's objection, the court held, 'Policy of the state to arrest population growth by resorting to various population control measures is certainly a laudable objective. So is the objective of granting maternity benefit to women employees.'
