Landmark ruling directs state compliance with judicial principles for government employees.
In a significant judgment, the Madras High Court has ruled in favor of P. Mangaiyarkkarasi, a government employee, granting her maternity leave for her third pregnancy. The court's decision comes after the denial of her request by the Registrar General of the High Court, which was based on the absence of provisions in the Tamil Nadu Fundamental Rules for such leave.
The Division Bench, consisting of Justices R. Suresh Kumar and Shamim Ahmed, emphasized that judicial orders regarding maternity benefits should be treated as orders in rem, applicable broadly, rather than being confined to individual cases. This directive aims to ensure consistent application of judicial principles across similar cases in the future.
The judgment referenced previous rulings, including the Supreme Court's decision in Umadevi v. Government of Tamil Nadu and the Madras High Court's ruling in B. Rajintha v. The Registrar General, High Court of Madras. Both cases supported the extension of maternity leave benefits for a third pregnancy, highlighting a precedent for the current judgment.
Justice R. Suresh Kumar criticized the Registrar General's interpretation of these judicial orders as applicable solely to the petitioners of those cases, describing such a viewpoint as flawed and inconsistent with established legal principles. The court instructed the respondents to extend maternity leave benefits to Mangaiyarkkarasi for the period from August 8, 2025, to August 7, 2026, with all associated service benefits.
Further, the court directed the Registrar General and the Chief Secretary of the Government of Tamil Nadu to circulate this order to all judicial officers and government departments to prevent future denials of maternity leave under similar circumstances. This directive underscores the importance of adhering to judicial principles to avoid repeated injustices faced by employees.
This ruling is seen as a significant step in reinforcing the rights of government employees, ensuring equitable treatment and compliance with judicial decisions across the state. The judgment is expected to have widespread implications for government servants, promoting consistent application of maternity benefits regardless of the number of pregnancies.
Bottom Line:
Maternity Leave - Denial of maternity leave for the third pregnancy to a woman government servant is not in line with judicial principles laid down in prior judgments. Judicial orders interpreting such benefits should be treated as orders in rem and not limited to individual cases.
Statutory provision(s): Tamil Nadu Fundamental Rules.
