Child Care Leave is not an absolute right but must meet welfare of children

Delhi High Court Grants Relief in Child Care Leave Dispute. Petitioner Rajesh Rathi Wins Case Against Govt. of NCT of Delhi Over Arbitrary Denial of Child Care Leave  

In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has ruled in favor of Smt. Rajesh Rathi, a government school teacher, who challenged the denial of Child Care Leave (CCL) by the Government of NCT of Delhi. The court has directed the respondents to convert the previously sanctioned Extraordinary Leave (EOL) into CCL for the period from July 2017 to April 2018, marking a crucial precedent in the interpretation of CCL provisions under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972.

Smt. Rathi, employed as a TGT (Mathematics) teacher, initially applied for CCL to care for her two children while her husband was frequently abroad due to professional commitments. Her requests were repeatedly denied by the school authorities citing administrative inconvenience and lack of substitute teachers. Despite these refusals, the authorities sanctioned EOL for the same period, which the petitioner contended was arbitrary and discriminatory.

The pivotal issue before the court was whether CCL could be denied on grounds of administrative exigency while EOL was simultaneously granted, thus questioning the arbitrary exercise of administrative discretion. The court opined that while CCL is not an absolute right, any denial must be justified and aligned with the welfare objectives under Rule 43-C of the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972.

The judgment extensively analyzed relevant statutory provisions, including Rule 43-C, which allows a woman government servant to avail up to 730 days of CCL during her service for child-related needs. The court emphasized that the rule serves a larger societal goal in securing the welfare of children and should be applied liberally unless there are compelling public interest considerations.

Citing precedents such as Kakali Ghosh v. Andaman & Nicobar Admn., the court reaffirmed that CCL should not be arbitrarily denied when EOL is sanctioned for the same duration, as such actions contradict the rule's intent and spirit. The judgment noted that administrative inconvenience should not override the humanitarian purpose of CCL, especially when other leave types are granted without issue.

The ruling sets a precedent for similar cases, urging government authorities to exercise discretion fairly and align decisions with the underlying objectives of welfare rules. It underscores the importance of balancing professional duties with familial responsibilities, particularly for working mothers.

As a result of this judgment, Smt. Rajesh Rathi will have her EOL converted to CCL, offering financial relief and validating her rightful claim to leave under the prescribed rules. This decision marks a significant step in the judicial interpretation of leave entitlements, advocating for fair administrative practices.

Statutory provision(s): Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972 Rule 43-C, Article 21 of the Constitution of India

Smt. Rajesh Rathi v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, (Delhi)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2807212