Madras High Court ruled State cannot discriminate in maternity benefits for third pregnancy. Bench of R. Suresh Kumar and N. Senthil Kumar upheld equal care and leave rights.
The Madras High Court has held that the State cannot adopt a discriminatory approach while granting maternity benefits to its employees, particularly in cases involving a third pregnancy.
The ruling was delivered by a Division Bench comprising Justices R. Suresh Kumar and N. Senthil Kumar on April 28, while allowing a petition filed by Shayee Nisha.
The case arose after the petitioner, a judicial employee, sought maternity leave for her third pregnancy. Her request was rejected by the Principal District Judge, Villupuram, through an order dated March 27, 2026, relying on G.O. No. 18 issued by the Human Resources Management Department.
Additionally, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Villupuram directed her to resume duties on April 27, 2026. Challenging these directions, the petitioner approached the High Court.
Upon examining the matter, the Court quashed both the order of the District Judge and the direction of the Tribunal. It directed the District Judge to reconsider the petitioner’s application and grant maternity leave on the same footing as that extended to women during their first and second pregnancies. The Court further directed that such consideration must be completed within one week, irrespective of the Government Order dated March 13, 2026.
The Bench noted that the March 13, 2026 Government Order permitted maternity leave for a third pregnancy but restricted it to 12 weeks. Referring to earlier rulings of the Supreme Court of India and prior Division Bench judgments of the High Court, the judges held that such a restriction could not override binding judicial precedents.
The Court observed,
“This kind of restriction made by the government by issuing GO under its executive power vested in them under Article 162 of the Constitution against the dictum of the Supreme Court as well as this Court cannot be approved.”
Read Also: Maternity Leave for Government Employees| Delhi HC Urges Centre to Review 2-Child Policy
Addressing the rationale behind limiting maternity leave to 12 weeks, the Court found no valid justification for differentiating between pregnancies. It emphasised that the physical and medical requirements associated with pregnancy remain the same, irrespective of whether it is the first, second, or third.
The Bench stated,
“For restricting the leave period to 12 weeks, absolutely there was no justification on the part of the government. If it was a pregnancy, may be the first, second or the third, suffering would be the same and pre-delivery as well as post-delivery care must be taken by the women. This was equal to all such pregnancies. Therefore, no discrimination could be shown by the government in approving the maternity benefits, especially maternity leave for the third pregnancy to the employees.”
The Court also took note of Tamil Nadu’s status as a welfare-oriented State that has introduced several schemes to support women’s health and well-being. In this context, it held that restricting maternity leave benefits for a third pregnancy was inconsistent with both the State’s policy objectives and the legal principles settled by the Supreme Court in precedents such as Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi and subsequent High Court rulings including B. Ranjitha and P. Mangaiyarkkarasi.
Read Also: Delhi HC Rules on Maternity Benefits for Legal Aid Lawyers
The Bench observed,
“Therefore, the import of GO dated March 13,2026, in our considered view, shall not control the District Judiciary in dealing with these kinds of applications from pregnant women for sanction of maternity leave, even for third pregnancy”
Further, the Court examined the reliance placed by the State on Section 5 of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, which had been cited to justify limiting maternity leave to 12 weeks. It held that, in light of the evolving legal position and binding judicial precedents, such a limitation had effectively lost its relevance.
The Bench concluded,
“Therefore, we think that the said justification given by the government in restricting the maternity leave benefit only for 12 weeks’ period for third pregnancy is unjustifiable,”
The judgment reinforces the principle of equality in service conditions and underscores that maternity benefits must be extended uniformly, without arbitrary distinctions based on the number of pregnancies.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE