MP High Court: In a writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, challenging the order passed by Principal, Government Tilak PG College, Katni (M.P.), which granted 6 months of maternity leave to the petitioner but without honorarium, a Single Judge Bench of Vishal Dhagat*, J., set aside the impugned order and held that the bar of eighty working days in the preceding twelve months, in an establishment, as per Section 5, Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, does not apply to establishments under State Government.
Background
On 16 June 2023, an order was passed by Principal, Government Tilak PG College, Katni (M.P.), granting maternity leave to petitioner for the period of 6 months but without honorarium. It was passed in accordance with Circular of State Government and Section 5, Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, subsequently, to amend the previous one which granted maternity leave with honorarium. However, the petitioner challenged contending that the said order was bad in law and paid maternity leave should be granted to her as per the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.
On the contrary, the respondents contended that since the petitioner was a guest faculty and engaged on contract basis, she did not fulfil the criteria of a government employee, which made the MP Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 inapplicable to her. Hence, the previous order granting leave with honorarium was modified and leave of 6 months was sanctioned without it.
Analysis
The Court, while deciding upon the question as to whether the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 is applicable to petitioner or not, referred to the definition of “establishment” under Section 2(1), Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 and observed that the definition of establishment given in Section 2(1) is wide and covers any establishment belonging to government and where ten or more persons are employed on any day preceding twelve months. On such findings, the Court held that the Act is applicable to the petitioner.
The Court observed that the Act gives right to payment of maternity benefit to every woman upon having been employed in establishment not less than 80 days in a year preceding date of expected delivery, as per Section 5 of the Act. Further, the benefit of payment of wages for 26 weeks is to be granted to a woman and breakup of 26 weeks is 8 weeks before expected date of delivery and 18 weeks after delivery, permissible only if a woman has worked not less than 80 days in 12 months.
Highlighting the directive principles of State policy, the Court referred to Articles 38 and 39 of the Constitution of India, which respectively state that the State shall strive to promote welfare of people and shall direct its policy towards securing health of workers, men, women and children of tender age. Mentioning the guidelines for the State Government to formulate its policy, the Court held that the bar of 80 working days in 12 months for availing benefit of grant of maternity leave, shall not be applicable over establishment of State Government and State is required to take welfare measures for its citizens.
Decision
Therefore, the Court set aside the impugned order and granted maternity leave to the petitioner for 26 weeks, i.e., 8 weeks before expected date of delivery and 18 weeks after period of delivery, in accordance with Section 5(1), Maternity Benefit Act, 1961. For rest of leave period, the Court directed that no honorarium to be paid to petitioner and the said period will be treated to be leave without pay.
[Priti Saket v. State of M.P., Writ Petition No. 9877 of 2026, 2026:MPHC-JBP:24642, decided on 24-3-2026]
*Judgment authored by: Justice Vishal Dhagat
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For Appellants: Hitendra Kumar Golhani, Ms. Kajal Vishwakarma
For Respondents: Kamal Singh Baghel
Buy Constitution of India HERE
