Nursing officer moves SC against HC order denying maternity leave as she already has 2 children from husband’s earlier marriage

Read SC Order: Deepika Singh vs Central Adminstrative Tribunal and Ors

Vivek Gupta

Chandigarh, July 5, 2021: The Supreme Court has issued notice on the plea of a nursing officer employed at the PGIMER in Chandigarh challenging the March order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court that dismissed her maternity leave petition on the ground that she already has two surviving children from her husband’s earlier marriage.

While deciding the case Deepika Singh v. Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh & Ors, the High Court had cited Rule 43 of Central Civil Services (leave) Rules 1972 which stated that a female government servant (including an apprentice) with less than two surviving children may be granted maternity leave by an authority competent to grant leave for a period of 180 days from the date of its commencement.

The High Court, however, stated that she is already the mother of two children and so she can’t be granted maternity leave for the third child. Rejecting the woman’s request for maternity leave, the High Court had converted the same to Earned Leave.

Her maternity leave request was rejected in the first place keeping in view the fact that she had availed child care leave earlier by showing two surviving children, born from the first marriage of her husband, on many occasions from the institute. She also entered the names of the two children from the first wedlock of her husband, in the office record and availed the facility of medical treatment for them, the court order said.

The petitioner contended that the child born by her was required to be treated as her first child for the purpose of maternity leave since her two other children are not her biological kids. She said that on February 18, 2014, she married Amir Singh who had two children from his earlier wedlock. 

However, the High Court stated in its order that the claim of the petitioner, that the child born by her was required to be treated as her first child for the purpose of maternity leave, was not admissible under the Rules.

“Though, the petitioner is not the biological mother of the two children born from the first wedlock of her husband, she cannot deny the fact that now she is the mother of them also after having married to Amar Singh. In this way, the petitioner has already two surviving children. Not only this, she has also availed child care leave for them from the PGIMER. In this view of the matter, any child born to her is to be considered as a third child,” stated the high court order on March 16, 2021.

The petitioner’s counsel Dheeraj Chawla told LegitEye that based on her petition, the Supreme Court on July 1 issued notice to the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER) in Chandigarh seeking its reply.

Chawla said during the hearing, the bench of Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice M R Shah were surprised to notice that all the courts below had mechanically and in a summary manner rejected the plea of the appellant without interpreting the rule for the purpose it was enacted and that the child for which she sought maternity leave was her first biological child.

The Supreme Court will hear the matter next on September 7.