New Delhi:

The Supreme Court has asked the Centre to explain the rationale behind a provision which entitles only those women, who adopt a child below the age of three months, to seek maternity leave benefits.

The apex court was hearing a plea challenging the constitutional validity of a provision of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 which entitles only those women who are adopting a child below the age of three months to seek benefits of maternity leave for a period of 12 weeks.

A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Pankaj Mithal said the case put up by the petitioner in public interest prima facie was that the provision was a social welfare legislation and there was no reasonable classification when it restricted the age of infant up to three months.

“In other words, if a woman adopts a child above the age of three months, she will not be entitled to any such maternity leave benefit as provided under the Amendment Act,” the bench noted in its November 12 order.

It said the Centre has filed its reply justifying the prescription of the age of three months but during the course of the hearing, many issues have cropped up which require consideration.

“In such circumstances, we expect the Union of India to file a further reply on the issue discussed today, more particularly, as to what is the rationale in saying that it is only that woman who adopts a child below the age of three months would be entitled to seek maternity leave benefits otherwise not,” the bench said.

It said the reply be filed within three weeks.

The bench said a copy of the reply to be filed be served to the counsel for the petitioner well in advance and a rejoinder, if any, be filed within a week thereafter.

It posted the matter for final disposal on December 17.

In October 2021, the apex court sought a response from the Centre on the plea which claimed section 5(4) of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 was discriminatory and arbitrary. “Section 5(4) apart from being discriminatory and arbitrary towards the adoptive mothers, also arbitrarily discriminates against orphaned, abandoned or surrendered children above the age of three months, which is completely incompatible to the object of the Maternity Benefit Act as well as the Juvenile Justice Act,” the plea said.

The petition stated the purported 12 weeks of maternity benefit to adoptive mothers was not only a “mere lip service but when juxtaposed with the maternity benefit of 26 weeks provided to biological mothers, fails to stand even the basic scrutiny of Part III of the Constitution which is wedded to the concept of non-arbitrariness”.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Bhopal:

Women guest teachers across government schools in Madhya Pradesh are seeking provisions for paid maternity leaves, similar to those provided to their permanent counterparts, amid fears of facing termination or being forced to resign, even as the administration recently held a meeting to review the issue.

Permanent teachers at state government-run schools are entitled to 180 days of paid maternity leaves. Guest teachers, however, are not provided such benefits and face the risk of salary deduction in case they go on maternity leave.

“When I got pregnant, they (school administration) encouraged me to keep working, saying they would look into it if a rule (not being entitled to paid maternity leaves) existed. After my delivery, I was forced to quit my job. I never wanted to quit; the school administration ) had promised me that I would be informed of any changes. I received no updates and I wasn’t informed before my name was removed (from the guest teachers’ list). I belong to a middle class family and losing this job has been very challenging. It’s been two years, and I still have no work,” Priya Nema, who worked as a guest teacher at a Government school in Kalapeepal, Shajapur district, said. She joined on July 22, 2019 and was removed on November 1, 2022.

Similarly, Jagdish Parmar said his daughter-in-law (who is a guest teacher at a school) is pregnant and has been advised bed rest, but is unable to go on leave.

“She had suffered a miscarriage once earlier. Now, doctors have advised her bed rest but she is unable to do so because of her job,” Parmar said.

In 2018, the government of Madhya Pradesh had issued an order, allowing unpaid maternity leaves to women guest teachers in government Colleges. But the guest teachers in schools, however, claimed they are still not allowed to opt for maternity leaves.

Guest Teachers Association state secretary, Ravikant Gupta, said: “We are not granted any leaves. Even when we are unwell. In February 2014, it was proposed to offer 13 days of leave and six months of maternity leave for women, but no official order has been issued. We’ve approached ministers and state officials with our request but in vain.”

Officials in the state education department acknowledged the problem faced by pregnant women guest teachers at government institutes, saying it has prompted several of them to either quit or face termination without notice.

“We have reviewed the rules extensively and there are no such provisions for guest teachers. We haven’t received any formal complaints so far but we have sought the guidance of higher authorities and are awaiting further instructions,” Bhopal district education officer Narendra Ahirwar said.

Social worker Meeta Wadhwa expressed concerns over the absence of such provisions for pregnant women employees. “The government has good provisions for regular employees but the guest teachers are left out. It is troubling that women are either forced to resign or denied leaves. This affects both their mental and physical health. This issue should be reconsidered,” Wadhwa said.