- (1.) THE Petitioner is working as a Lecturer in the Government Degree College, Sambhal, District Moradabad on contract basis. She claims that she would be entitled to maternity leave which is not being granted to her on the ground that she is working on contract basis and is not a regular employee.
(2.) A Division Bench of Lucknow Bench of this Court has in the case of Dr. Parul Misra v. State of U.P. and Ors. (Service Bench No. 67 of 2010) has decided such matter by a reasoned and detailed order dated 27.1.2010 wherein it has been held as follows: In Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll) and Anr. : (2000) 3 SCC 224, the Supreme Court, after considering the rights of a lady for maternity leave held that the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 extended the benefits even to the muster roll employees. It was observed by the Supreme Court that a just social order can be achieved only when inequalities are obliterated and everyone is provided what is legally due. Women who constitute almost half of the segment of the society have to be honoured and treated with dignity at places where they work to earn their livelihood. Whatever be the nature of their duties, their avocation and the place where they work; they must be provided all the facilities to which they are entitled. To become a mother is the most natural phenomenon in the life of a woman, whenever leave is needed to facilitate the birth of child to a woman who is in service, the employer has to be considerate and sympathetic towards her and must realise the physical difficulties which a working woman would face in performing her duties at the workplace while carrying a baby in the womb or while rearing up the child after birth. The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 aims to provide all these facilities to a working woman in a dignified manner so that she may overcome the state of motherhood honourably, peaceably, undeterred by the fear of being victimised for forced absence during the pre -or post -natal period. The Petitioner has a right to avail the maternity leave, which is applicable to regularly employed lecturers in the Government Degree Colleges. Although the Respondents have not yet taken a decision on the leave application, we do not find that the objection taken by the Standing Counsel, that a contractual employee is not entitled to maternity leave, is justified. The purpose of the maternity leave does not change with the nature of employment. It is concerned with human rights of the women. The employers and courts are bound under the constitutional scheme, guaranteeing right to life, including right to live with dignity and to protect the health of both the mother and child to preserve these rights. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with directions to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to consider and decide Petitioner's application for maternity leave within a period of two weeks from the date she submits her application in accordance with the judgment in Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll) and Ors. cited as above, and the observations made in this judgment. Accordingly, in terms of the said judgment and Order passed in the case of Dr. Parul Misra (Service Bench No. 67 of 2010), this writ petition is also disposed of with the direction that the Respondent No. 1 -Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Lucknow shall consider and decide the Petitioner's application for maternity leave within two weeks from the date she submits her application in accordance with the judgment in Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll) supra, and the observations made in this judgment.;