{"id":317056,"date":"2024-03-15T11:30:18","date_gmt":"2024-03-15T06:00:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=317056"},"modified":"2024-03-21T12:11:45","modified_gmt":"2024-03-21T06:41:45","slug":"delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of a contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> An appeal was filed assailing the order dated 06-10-2023 passed by the Single vide the impugned order, the Single Judge has partly allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent by directing the appellants to grant her maternity and medical benefits for a period of 26 weeks on account of her pregnancy as per the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961<\/a>. A division bench of Rekha Palli and Shalinder Kaur, JJ., upheld the decision of the Single Judge to grant maternity and medical benefits to the respondent for a period of 26 weeks, as per the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961<\/a> on being devoid of merits in the appellant’s argument that the benefits should cease upon the expiry of the respondent’s contractual engagement. The Court also imposed costs of Rs 50,000 on the appellants to be paid to the respondent.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that “In fact, we are surprised that the Govt. of NCT of Delhi, which is giving great publicity to the steps being taken to promote the interest of women in Delhi and has under its recently announced scheme i.e., Mukhyamantri Mahila Samman Yojna promised to pay all adult women in the city except those who are tax-payers\/government employees or are drawing pension, a monthly sum of Rs.1,000\/- in the future has chosen to file such a misconceived appeal to assail an order which grants the benefits under the Act to a young woman, who has with utmost dedication served in the Delhi State Consumer Forum over 5 years.”<\/span><\/p>\n

The respondent was appointed as a stenographer contractually with the Delhi State Consumer Forum on 07-02-2013. The contractual period was initially set for one year. Following the initial contract, the respondent’s contractual engagement was extended. These extensions were either without any break or with a notional break of one or two days. The respondent had served in her position diligently for over five years, demonstrating unblemished service during her tenure from 2013 until the events leading to the petition. On 28-02-2018, while still under contractual engagement, the respondent applied for maternity leave. She requested leave for 180-days, commencing from 01-03-2018, in accordance with the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961<\/a>. The appellants declined the respondent’s request for maternity leave benefits citing the impending expiration of the respondent’s contractual engagement on 31-03-2018, as grounds for denial. On this basis, she filed a writ petition seeking redressal for the denial of her entitlement to maternity benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Counsel for appellants contended that the expiry of the respondent’s contractual engagement absolved them of any obligation to provide maternity benefits beyond this date. According to their interpretation, the contractual end date served as a limitation on their liability to pay benefits, including maternity leave wages and associated medical benefits. Additionally, the appellants raised concerns regarding the financial implications of extending maternity benefits beyond the contractual period, citing potential strains on the resources of the Delhi State Consumer Forum. Counsel for the respondent asserted her entitlement to maternity benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961<\/a>. She argued that the Act mandated the provision of maternity benefits, including leave wages and medical benefits, for 26-weeks. The respondent emphasized that she had complied with all statutory requirements by submitting her application for maternity leave in accordance with the Act’s provisions. She further contended that denying her maternity benefits based solely on the expiry of her contractual engagement would contravene the spirit and intent of the Maternity Benefit Act, which seeks to protect the rights of pregnant women in the workforce.<\/p>\n

The Court reiterated the observations and noting’s by Single Judge in the impugned decision wherein he examined the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961<\/a>, with emphasis on Section 5, which governs entitlement to maternity benefits. It was observed that the Act allows for the extension of benefits beyond the contractual period, highlighting the legislative intent to protect the rights of pregnant women in the workforce. This interpretation underscored the importance of upholding the statutory provisions to ensure the welfare of pregnant employees. Moreover, the broader social welfare objectives of the Maternity Benefit Act was emphasized.<\/p>\n

The Court underscored the duty of the State and employers to uphold the integrity and objectives of such legislation in line with constitutional principles. By invoking principles of natural justice, the Court scrutinized the appellants’ argument regarding the expiration of the respondent’s contractual engagement. It was noted that denying maternity benefits solely based on the contract term’s expiry would be unjust, particularly given the respondent’s compliance with statutory requirements and the absence of any misconduct allegations.<\/p>\n

The Single Judge in the impugned decision remarked as follows:<\/p>\n

“It is ironic that the petitioner in the instant case, worked with the State Consumer Forum as a stenographer, is a court staff and assisted in the dispensation of justice by the Forum, however, she had to herself approach this Court for justice since she was not being able to secure the benefits that were necessary for the best interest and welfare of her own child.<\/p>\n

This Court is of the considered view that the State being a model employer, is expected to act in line of Constitution and set the benchmark for other employers. Under the veil of contractual service, principles of natural justice and facets of constitutionality cannot be given go bye.”<\/p>\n

Thus, the Court held that the respondent was entitled to receive maternity benefits for the full duration of 26 weeks, as stipulated by the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961<\/a> and dismissed the appellants’ argument and affirmed the respondent’s rights under the law. The court also ordered the dismissal of the appeal along with all pending applications, imposing costs of Rs. 50,000 on the appellants. These costs were directed to be paid to the respondent within four weeks from the date of the decision.<\/p>\n

[GNCTD v. Rehmat Fatima, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 1749<\/a>, decided on 12-03-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

Mr. Yeeshu Jain, ASC, GNCTD with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Ms. Manisha & Mr. Hitanshu Mishra, Advocates for appelants<\/p>\n

Mr. Syed Hasan Isfahani and Mr. Syed Mohd. Hassan, Advcates for respondents<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court expressed surprise at GNCTD filing an appeal challenging the provision of benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act to a dedicated young woman who served in the Delhi State Consumer Forum for over five years on contractual basis considering their efforts to promote women’s interests, such as the Mukhyamantri Mahila Samman Yojna promising a monthly sum of Rs. 1,000 to adult women in Delhi, excluding tax-payers, government employees, or pensioners.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67516,"featured_media":314886,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[66406,2543,66408,65683,32226,31274,33062,43322,66407],"class_list":["post-317056","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-contractual-engagement","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-delhi-state-consumer-forum","tag-employment-rights","tag-government-of-nct-of-delhi","tag-maternity-benefit-act","tag-maternity-benefits","tag-model-employer","tag-mukhyamantri-mahila-samman-yojna"],"yoast_head":"\nDelhi HC upholds maternity benefits of contractual employee; Imposes costs on employer| SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of a contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-03-15T06:00:18+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-03-21T06:41:45+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of a contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi HC upholds maternity benefits of contractual employee; Imposes costs on employer| SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-03-15T06:00:18+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-03-21T06:41:45+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of a contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\",\"name\":\"Arunima\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Arunima\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Delhi HC upholds maternity benefits of contractual employee; Imposes costs on employer| SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of a contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum","og_description":"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-03-15T06:00:18+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-03-21T06:41:45+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arunima","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of a contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arunima","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/","name":"Delhi HC upholds maternity benefits of contractual employee; Imposes costs on employer| SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-03-15T06:00:18+00:00","dateModified":"2024-03-21T06:41:45+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb"},"description":"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/15\/delhi-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-contractual-employee-imposes-costs-employer-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi High Court upholds maternity benefits of a contractual employee; Imposes costs on Delhi State Consumer Forum"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb","name":"Arunima","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Arunima"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":300159,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/26\/maternity-benefit-cannot-be-denied-to-contractual-female-employee-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":317056,"position":0},"title":"Contractual female employees cannot be denied maternity benefits solely due to nature of employment; Delhi HC directs DSLSA to grant maternity benefit to its advocate","author":"Editor","date":"August 26, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201c It is ironic that the petitioner being appointed with the Juvenile Justice Board, is hired to protect the interest and welfare of the children who may be suffering at the hands of criminal justice system, however, is not able to secure the benefits that are necessary for the best\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":304272,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/10\/delhi-hc-grants-maternity-benefits-to-contractual-employee-whose-contract-ended-during-pregnancy-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":317056,"position":1},"title":"\u2018Nature of employment will not decide maternity benefits\u2019: Delhi HC grants maternity benefits to contractual employee whose contract ended during pregnancy","author":"Editor","date":"October 10, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cMere creation of the welfare legislation is not enough. A duty is cast upon the State and the subjects of the Act, to uphold the integrity, objective and the provisions of the legislation in its true letter and spirit.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":264684,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/29\/maternity-leave-5\/","url_meta":{"origin":317056,"position":2},"title":"Can maternity leave benefits extend beyond the period when contractual period of an ad hoc employee comes to an end? Del HC analyses","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 29, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: In a claim of maternity benefit by a contractual employee, the Division Bench of Rajiv Shakdher and Talwant Singh, JJ., expressed that, The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 Act is a social legislation that should be worked in a manner that progresses not only the best interest of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":352328,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/04\/orissa-hc-on-maternity-benefit-to-contractual-employee\/","url_meta":{"origin":317056,"position":3},"title":"Denying maternity benefit to contractual employee is abhorrent to humanity and womanhood: Orissa HC","author":"Editor","date":"July 4, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cPhysical companionship of mother and the baby was mutually advantageous as it promoted bonding between the two, which was essential for their wellbeing. A lactating mother had a fundamental right to breastfeed her baby during its formative years and, similarly, baby had a fundamental right to be breastfed.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Maternity benefit contractual employee","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Maternity-benefit-contractual-employee.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Maternity-benefit-contractual-employee.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Maternity-benefit-contractual-employee.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Maternity-benefit-contractual-employee.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":281876,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/18\/woman-is-not-a-pendulum-and-cannot-be-forced-to-swing-between-motherhood-and-employment-madras-high-court-upholds-maternity-benefits-as-welfare-legislation-and\/","url_meta":{"origin":317056,"position":4},"title":"\u201cWoman is not a pendulum and cannot be forced to swing between motherhood and employment\u201d,Madras High Court upholds maternity benefits, as welfare legislation and benefits cannot be deprived on mere interpretation and technicalities","author":"Editor","date":"January 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"It is to be remembered that birth of a baby is rebirth of a mother and if a woman is not properly taken care during the period of pregnancy and after delivery, it will certainly affect two lives, namely, mother and new borns","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madras High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/Madras-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":300166,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/28\/maternity-benefits-can-go-beyond-duration-of-contractual-employment-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":317056,"position":5},"title":"Explained | Supreme Court verdict on claim of maternity benefits beyond the duration of contractual employment","author":"Apoorva","date":"August 28, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe expression \u201cdischarge\u201d is of wide import, and it would include \u201cdischarge on conclusion of the contractual period\u201d.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"maternity benefits","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/maternity-benefits.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/maternity-benefits.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/maternity-benefits.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/maternity-benefits.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/317056","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67516"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=317056"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/317056\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=317056"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=317056"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=317056"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}