The Supreme Court on Friday observed that maternity leave is integral to maternity benefits and reproductive rights are now recognised as part of several intersecting domains of international human rights law, setting aside a Madras High Court order which denied the facility to a government teacher who was awaiting the birth of her third child. The high court had cited state policy restricting benefits to two children.

The bench comprising Justices AS Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan in its verdict noted that there is a need to “harmonise” the policy objective of population control and maternity benefits for women employees.

“We have delved into the concept of reproductive rights and have held that maternity benefits are a part of reproductive rights and maternity leave is integral to maternity benefits. Therefore, the impugned order has been set aside,” the bench noted.

“Reproductive rights are now recognised 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,” it added.

The top court made a distinction between her first two pregnancies and the third one when it came to availing the benefits of the state policy on maternity leaves.

WHAT IS THE CASE?

The order was pronounced in an appeal filed by a Tamil Nadu-based government school teacher, who had two biological children with her first husband, born in 2007 and 2011. She then entered government service in 2012, as a school teacher.

The couple parted ways after a divorce in 2017, and the woman got married again in 2019. In 2021, she applied for maternity leave of nine months, but was denied.

The authorities noted that the maternity leave benefit was available only for “up to two living children”. This being her third pregnancy, with two children living with her first husband, would make her ineligible.

The teacher moved the high court challenging the denial of maternity leave. While a single-judge bench accepted her argument and granted maternity leave, the Tamil Nadu government filed a counter-appeal. A Division bench of the high court then set aside the single-judge order. The division bench also held that the grant of maternity leave was not a fundamental right.

The petitioner approached the Supreme Court against this order.

TAMIL NADU GOVERNMENT’S STAND

The Tamil Nadu government in its submissions noted that the rules relating to maternity benefits bar the grant of maternity benefits beyond the second child.

The state government’s counsel also argued that any deviation from the established policy would potentially overwhelm the exchequer and impact administrative efficacy. Further, he claimed that this would amount to incentivising the breach of population control norms.

SUPREME COURT OBSERVATION

The Supreme Court has held that the appellant teacher shall be granted maternity leave under FR 101(a) of the Tamil Nadu rules. It has also directed the state to release the maternity benefits that apply to be released within two months.

“In the context of employment, childbirth has to be construed as a natural incident of life and, hence, provisions for maternity leave must be construed in that perspective,” observed the bench.

Tune In