KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA,J. - (1.) The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying that the petitioner who has been engaged as contractual employee on the post of Cook be granted 180 days maternity leave.
(2.) Whether a contractual employee engaged under a Scheme of the Govt, is entitled to grant of 180 days leave toward maternity leave, is an issue which has already been decided in affirmative by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 14.2.2017 in Meenakshi Rao v. The State of Rajasthan and Ors., SBCWP No.1598/2017. The order passed by the co-ordinate Bench on 14.2.2017 in the case of Meenakshi Rao (supra) reads as under:- "Counsel submits that the petitioner remained on maternity leave from 06.12.2016 to 02.06.2017 (180 days) and period of maternity leave was not sanctioned to her being appointed on contract/temporary basis. The issue regarding entitlement of maternity leave to temporary employees has been settled by this court in the case of Neetu Choudhary (Smt.) v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. reported in 2008 (2) RLW 1404 (Raj.) and that has been upheld by the Division Bench. Even in terms of R.103 of the Rules, 1951, this court has observed that for the grant of maternity leave status of the employee is not material and employees appointed on temporary/contract basis are entitled for and no distinction could be made on the basis of their nature of appointment. So far as the employee appointed on contractual/ temporary basis is concerned, a circular has been issued by the respondents on 06.11.2007 to benefit of maternity leave can be claimed. R.103 of the Rules, 1951 reads ad infra:- "103. Maternity Leave - Maternity leave may be granted to a female Government Servant with less than two surviving children upto a period of 135 days from the date of its commencement. However, if there is no surviving child even after availing it twice Maternity Leave may be granted on one more occasion. During such period she will be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately before proceeding on leave. Such leave shall not be debited to the leave account but such entry should be made in the service book separately." In view of the fact that they are contractual employees certainly would be entitled for maternity leave pursuant to the circular dated 06.11.2007 and those who are appointed on temporary/contract basis would certainly be entitled to the maternity leave u/R.103 of the Rules, 1951 and this issue has been settled by this court in the case of Neetu Choudhary, of which reference has been made supra, and has been upheld by the Division Bench at main seat at Jodhpur in D.B.Special Appeal (Writ) No.01703/2009 (State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Smt. Dr. Monika Sharma) decided on 23.04.2010 but the respondents on her application seeking maternity leave, have sanctioned maternity leave for a period of two months, as reveals from order dated 05.08.2016 (Annex.3). Once the petitioner stands entitled to claim maternity leave, in terms of Rule 103 of the Rules, 1951, the order passed by the respondents sanctioning a period of two months dated 05.08.2016 certainly is not sustainable in the law and since the issue has been finally settled by this court, remains no more res integra to be further examined by this court. Accordingly, in the light of the discussion supra, the order passed by the respondents dated 05.08.2016 is not sustainable in law and the instant writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to allow maternity leave and benefit in consequence thereof to the petitioner, in terms of R.103 of the Rules, 1951. In case of any difficulty in carrying out the directions given above, the respondents are at liberty to move an application for modification/clarification of the order."
(3.) Mr. Sanjay Sharma, Government Counsel appearing for the respondents could not distinguish the order passed in the case of Meenakshi Rao (supra).;