Part Time Contract Teacher Is Entitled To Benefits Under Maternity Benefit Act: Gauhati HC
The Gauhati High Court held that the part time contract teacher is entitled to maternity benefits in terms of relevant provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.
The Court was hearing a Writ Petition seeking to set aside the communications that informed the Petitioner that maternity leave and its added benefits are admissible to only regular employees of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS).
The bench of Justice Nelson Sailo observed, “…having regard to the decision of the Apex Court she would still be entitled to maternity benefits provided by the Act of 1961…Under the circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner would be entitled to maternity benefits in terms of the relevant provisions of the Act of 1961.”
Advocate S. Banik appeared for the Appellant and Asstt. SGI A. Dasr appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
The Petitioner was appointed as a part-time contract teacher at Kendriya Vidyalaya for three consecutive terms from 2012 to 2015. During her second tenure, she got married and later gave birth to a baby. Following her last contract term ending before her delivery, she did not apply for re-engagement. However, before that, her husband had inquired through RTI about maternity benefits for contractual teachers, and they were informed that such benefits were only available to permanent teachers.
The Court mentioned the decision of the Supreme Court in Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd. Vs. Workmen (1967) where according to the Court it was observed, “provision of the Act of 1961 nowhere provides that only regular employees would be given the benefits of maternity leave and not those engaged on casual basis or muster roll or daily wage basis.”
The Court further noted that the Apex Court held that the provisions of the Act of 1961 would be applicable to woman employees irrespective of their nature of engagement.
The Court also mentioned the Supreme Court decision in Dr. Kavita Yadav Vs. Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Department and Ors. (2024) where the Court took into consideration the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Female Workers (Muster Roll) and Anr., and it was held, “…same did not lead to an interpretation that the maternity benefits cannot survive or go beyond the duration of employment of an employee. Even in a case where the applicant woman dies after delivery of the child, the benefit as per the last proviso to Section 5(3) of the Act of 1961 would be available.”
Accordingly, the Court allowed the Writ Petition.
Cause Title: Sangeeta Kormel Yadav v. Union of India (Neutral Citation: GAHC010123612015)
Appearance:
Appellant: Adv. S. Banik
Respondent: : Asstt. SGI A. Dasr, T. Bora, CKS Baruah, CGC SC Biswas, Advocates KLR Yanthan and S. Biswas
