Page 215 - DCOM207_LABOUR_LAWS

Labour Laws

Notes


Case Study Maternity Benefit Act is Applicable Upon Contractual
Employees

he petitioner was appointed on contract basis for three years. She became pregnant.
She absented for 106 days. She applied for maternity leave. She was directed to hand
Tover charge. Her absence was treated as leave without pay. Maternity benefits were
denied to her as per terms of contractual employment. The petitioner was notified that till
the date of handing over the charge, the absence will be treated as leave without allowance
and she was directed to hand over the office mobile and other assets, if any. Since the
maternity leave applied was not sanctioned, the petitioner got issued a legal notice for
sanction of maternity leave and for extending the legitimate benefits.

The petitioner delivered twins. The respondent terminated the contract of service with
the petitioner by invoking terms and conditions of her appointment letter. The petitioner
filed writ petition to quash the communications sent by the respondent, terminating the
contract and office order treating the period of absence as leave without allowances and to
direct the respondent to sanction maternity leave and disburse the pay and allowances for
the period of maternity leave and for consequential benefits, including permitting her to
resume duty after the expiry of the maternity leave or as per the medical advice.
The respondent in the counter has resisted the demands of the petitioner contending that
the petitioner accepted the offer and is bound by the terms and conditions of the contract
which does not provide for maternity leave benefits and hence, it is not open to the petitioner
to claim maternity leave benefits. The respondent further stated that as the petitioner
remained absent frequently on different dates on health grounds, issuance of the office
order is justified. It was also stated that the post to which the petitioner was appointed was
crucial post of Manager (Finance) which could not be kept vacant and it adversely affects
the work. She was given one month’s notice and thereafter her service was terminated.
Even the respondent is not notified under section 2 of the Maternity Benefits Act, 1961.

Held, in terms of the provisions of the Maternity Benefits Act, 1961, a woman is prohibited
from working in an establishment during the period of six weeks from immediately
following the day of her delivery, miscarriage or medical termination of pregnancy. She
would not be asked to work for the specified period in sub-section (4) of section 4. She
would be entitled to the benefits of sections 6 and 9 of the Act. Any Rule or Regulation
being subordinate legislation, is subject to provisions of the Parliament Act. Though the
appointment order along with the terms and conditions appended thereto issued to the
petitioner did not provide for grant of maternity leave and other benefits to which a woman
employee would be entitled to, the respondent has an obligation to provide the benefits in
view of the provisions contained in the Act as well as the Directive Principles of State Policy
enshrined in Article 42 of the Constitution of India. It is not disputed that the petitioner had
17 days in her credit whereas she remained absent for 106 days on health ground.
Since she was a contract employee and did not have the leave to her credit, the respondent
is right in treating the period as leave without allowance in excess of leave to her credit.
Petitioner’s prayer to permit her to resume her duty is not tenable since the appointment
was purely on contract basis and that period is already over. However, the petitioner is
entitled to all the benefits from the terms of appointment for the period of her maternity

Contd...

210 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY