‘Maternity Leave Cannot Be Construed Narrowly’: Justice Rekha Borana Says Woman’s Second Maternity Leave During Service Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Newborn Is Her Third Child
Jaipur: In a significant ruling on maternity benefits for government employees, the Rajasthan High Court has held that a woman employee cannot be denied her second maternity leave merely because the child born to her is her third biological child, when she had availed maternity leave only once during her government service.
Justice Rekha Borana, allowing the petition filed by government school teacher Chandra Kanta Pahariya, directed the Rajasthan Education Department to pass appropriate orders granting her maternity leave within one week.
The case involved an unusual situation arising after the petitioner’s second marriage. She was married in 1999 and gave birth to her first child in September 2000, five years before she entered government service. After her appointment as a teacher in 2005, she gave birth to her second child in October 2005 and availed her first maternity leave.
The petitioner subsequently obtained a divorce in 2015 and remarried in December 2023. A child was born from her second marriage on June 20, 2026. She thereafter applied for maternity leave, which was denied by the Department on the ground that the newborn was her third biological child, while two children were already reflected in her service record.
Third Biological Child Does Not Mean Third Maternity Leave
Rejecting the Department’s reasoning, the High Court examined Rules 103 and 103C of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, which govern maternity and child-care leave for government servants.
The Court held that the petitioner’s claim had to be considered from the standpoint of maternity leave availed during her service tenure. Since she had availed maternity leave only once after entering government service, the leave now sought was her second maternity leave during service.
The fact that the newborn was her third biological child, therefore, could not by itself be used to deny her the benefit.
‘Childbirth Is a Natural Incident of Life’
The Court relied upon the Supreme Court’s decision in K. Umadevi v. Government of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2025) 8 SCC 263, which emphasized that childbirth must be understood as a natural incident of life and that maternity-leave provisions should be interpreted in a manner that advances the purpose of the law rather than defeats it.
Court further observed that the State’s objective of population control and the objective of providing maternity benefits to women employees are not mutually exclusive and must be harmonised through a purposive interpretation.
The Court made it clear that the result could have been different if the petitioner had already availed maternity leave twice for children from her first marriage and had thereafter sought a third maternity leave for the child born from her second marriage.
“That not being so,” the Court held, and since the maternity leave sought was only the petitioner’s second during her service tenure, her entitlement could not have been denied merely because it was her third biological child.
Education Department Directed to Act Within One Week
Setting aside the denial, the High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders for grant of the maternity leave within one week from receipt of the order.