Bombay High Court: In a case revolving around whether a woman employed on a temporary basis, with technical breaks in service, could be denied maternity leave benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 (‘MB Act’), the Division Bench of Ajit B. Kadethankar and M.S. Karnik*, JJ., held that such denial was arbitrary and unjust, recognizing that the MB Act extended the protection even to women working on daily wages or temporary posts. The Court, while allowing the petition, directed that maternity benefits be granted and that failure to disburse the amount within four weeks would attract interest at 9% per annum.
Background:
The petitioner was working as an Assistant Professor on a temporary basis in the Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department since 21-09-2018, working continuously and uninterruptedly despite technical breaks of one or two days after 120 days of service. On 07-05-2021, while she was eight and a half months pregnant, she applied for maternity leave benefits, and she made a similar application again on 28-05-2021. Her applications were forwarded to the Director, Medical Education and Research, Mumbai (‘Director’). She had requested maternity leave from 08-05-2021 to 16-09-2021, i.e. 131 days with the benefit amounting to Rs 4,36,666. Though she was granted the leave, it was to be treated as leave without pay.
Analysis and Decision:
The Court noted the communication addressed by the Director which indicated that in respect of the women Professors, who were working on temporary basis (for 120/360 days) and whose services were continued by giving technical break, the benefits of maternity leave was not granted.
The Court analysed Section 5 of the MB Act, which stated that every woman shall be entitled to maternity benefit at the rate of her average daily wage for the period of her actual absence, including the day of her delivery as well as the days immediately preceding and following her delivery. The Court observed that even if a woman is working on temporary basis on daily wages, she is entitled to the benefits of the maternity leave. Thus, the Court held that the denial of the benefit of maternity leave to the petitioner only on the ground that she was granted a technical break of 1 or 2 days in service was unjustifiable and untenable.
The Court referred to Municipal Corpn. of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll), (2000) 3 SCC 224, and J.K. Cotton Spg. & Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. v. Labour Appellate Tribunal of India, 1963 SCC OnLine SC 172, and relied on Archana v. State of Maharashtra, 2018 SCC OnLine Bom 4136, wherein it was emphasised that the benefits of the MB Act were extended by the Supreme Court not only to working women in an ‘industry’ but also to the muster roll women employees of the Municipal Corporation working on daily wages. Similar benefits have also been extended to contractual or ad hoc women employees.
Thus, the Court concluded that the denial of maternity benefits in the present case was arbitrary, unjustifiable, and contrary to the benevolent object of the MB Act. The Court allowed the petition and directed the amount to be paid within 4 weeks, failing which an interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum would be applicable until actual disbursement.
[Dr. Vrushali Vasant Yadav v. State of Maharashtra, Writ Petition No. 15521 of 2024, decided on 16-12-2025]
*Judgment authored by: Justice M.S. Karnik
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Kedar Lad, Advocate.
For the Respondent: T.J. Kapre, AGP.