Right To Become A Mother Is Fundamental/Human Right Of Women; Maternity Benefits Act Provisions Must Be Strictly Enforced: HP HC
- ByAdmin --
- 06 Apr 2023 --
- 0 Comments
The Secretary, Managing Committee of Loreto Convent Tara Hall School vs Sharu Gupta that the right to become a mother is a fundamental/human right of a woman and the provisions of Maternity Benefits Act must be strictly enforced wherever applicable.
It is really in the fitness of things that while ruling fully, firmly and finally in favour of the right of woman to become a mother as a fundamental/human right of women, we see that the Himachal Pradesh High Court has in a most learned, laudable, landmark, latest and logical judgment titled The Secretary, Managing Committee of Loreto Convent Tara Hall School vs Sharu Gupta and Others in CWP No. 4122 of 2020 and cited in Neutral Citation No.: 2023:HHC:14597 that was pronounced as recently as on December 28, 2023 has minced just no words to hold clearly that the right to become a mother is a fundamental/human right of a woman and the provisions of Maternity Benefits Act must be strictly enforced wherever applicable.
The Court observed thus in a writ petition that was filed against the order passed by the Labour Commissioner-cum-Chief Inspector of Factories-cum-Appellate Authority under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961. In the ultimate analysis, we thus see finally that the Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition and refused to interfere in the impugned orders passed by the concerned authorities.
At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Vivek Singh Thakur sets the ball rolling by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that:
Petitioners have approached this Court, invoking provisions of Article 226 of Constitution of India, for setting aside the order dated 14th September, 2020 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Labour Commissioner-cum-Chief Inspector of Factories-cumAppellate Authority, under Maternity Benefit Act 1961, in appeal No. L-L&E (MB) Appeal-2019 titled Secretary Managing Committee of Loreto Convent Tara Hall School and another vs. Sharu Gupta and another, whereby order dated 16.10.2019 (Annexure P-3) passed by Labour Inspector Circle-1 Shimla (Authorized Inspector under Maternity Benefits Act), in case No. L1/SML/C-1/Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 (Sharu Gupta)/19 titled Sharu Gupta vs. the Secretary Managing Committee of Loreto Convent School, has been affirmed with modification by granting additional payment of three months salary to the respondent/claimant as per provisions contained in Section 17(2)(a)(b) of the Act, over and above the relief granted by the Authorized Inspector directing the petitioner to pay Rs.2,45,592/- as maternity benefit and salary for the month of September 2019 to the complainant and also to take joining of Sharu Gupta (complainant) on the same post as Assistant Teacher which she was holding before her proceeding on maternity leave.
Needless to say, the Bench states in para 2 that:
I have heard learned counsel for parties and have also perused the original record summoned from the petitioners as well as of Authorities.
To put things in perspective, the Bench envisages in para 3 that:
Admitted facts in present case are that respondent was appointed in Petitioner No.2-School, managed by Petitioner No.1, as Assistant Teacher on contract basis from 1.4.2016 to 31.07.2017. Subsequently, she was appointed on probation w.e.f. 1.7.2017 till 30.06.2018. Probation of respondent No.1 was extended from 1.7.2018 to 30.06.2019.
RELATED Blog
0 comments