Provisions Of Maternity Benefit Act Prevail Over Contractual Conditions Offering Less Favourable Benefit: Madras HC Reiterates

The Madras High Court has reiterated that by virtue of Section 27, the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 will prevail over contractual conditions denying or offering less favourable maternity benefits.

The Court was dealing with a Writ Petition filed by the Nurse's Association against the State Government's decision to deny them maternity benefits for being contractual employees.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice K.R. Shriram and Justice Senthil Kumar Ramamoorthy held, ".....by virtue of Section 27, the provisions of the 1961 Act will prevail over contractual conditions denying or offering less favourable maternity benefits. Consequently, the reliance by the respondents on condition 6 of the Appointment and Posting Order to deny maternity benefits is untenable."

The petitioner was represented by Advocate M.Padmavathy while the respondent was represented by Advocate General P.S.Raman.

It was the case of the Petitioner that the nurses have been working for more than two years and, therefore, would be eligible for maternity leave of 270 days with pay as per the Maternity Benefits Act, 1961. The State, however, denied them have been denied the same to NRHM nurses because they were contractual employees. Therefore, the present writ petition was filed.

The Respondents, in the affidavit-in-reply, had claimed that the nurses were not eligible for any kind of leave as applicable to regular Government servants except for the casual leave of one day for one month and day off. It was also stated that, in any other untoward exceptional circumstances, any individual is permitted to avail the leave other than the leave specified above that will be treated as leave on loss of pay. 

The Court cited the recent Judgment of the Supreme Court in Dr. Kavita Yadav v. Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Department and others, wherein, while considering the question as to whether maternity benefits as contemplated under the 1961 Act would apply to a lady employee appointed on contract if the period for which she claims such benefits overshoots the contractual period, it was held that once lady employee fulfils entitlement criteria specified in Section 5(2), she would be eligible for full maternity benefits even if such benefits exceed duration of her contract. It was also held that maternity benefits are not coterminous with employment tenure.

The Court also cited a consequent ruling in Deepika Singh v. PGIMER, Chandigarh wherein it was held that the 1961 Act was enacted to secure women's right to pregnancy and maternity leave and to afford women with as much flexibility as possible to live an autonomous life, both as a mother and as a worker, if they so desire. The Court held that once the employee fulfils entitlement criteria specified in Section 5(2) of the 1961 Act, she would be eligible for full maternity benefits even if such benefits exceed the duration of the contract.

In the background of this, the Court concluded that the nurses are eligible for maternity benefits despite being contractual employees.

The writ petition was accordingly allowed.

Cause Title: MRB Nurses Empowerment Association vs The Principal Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, State of Kerala

Click here to read/ download order