Introduction
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that maternity leave cannot be excluded from continuous service while determining eligibility for regularisation of female employees. The Court observed that denying service benefits on account of maternity leave amounts to penalising motherhood and violates constitutional principles of gender equality and social justice.
A Division Bench comprising and dismissed appeals filed by challenging an earlier single judge ruling in favour of female Banking Associates.
Legal Issue
The central issue before the Court was whether the period of sanctioned maternity leave could be excluded from the contractual service period while assessing eligibility for regularisation and consequential service benefits.
The Court also examined whether extending contractual tenure due to maternity leave and denying benefits linked to regularisation amounted to discrimination against women employees.
Background
The respondents were appointed as Banking Associates on a contractual basis for two years. Under the terms of appointment, they were entitled to regularisation upon satisfactory completion of service assessment.
During their contractual tenure, the respondents availed maternity leave, which had been duly sanctioned by the Bank. However, the Bank subsequently extended their contracts by the duration of the maternity leave period and treated that period as a break in continuous service.
As a result, while other employees who joined with them were regularised earlier, the respondents received delayed regularisation orders. This delay deprived them of benefits under Circular No. 752 dated 12.03.2021, which granted adjustment pay and revised pay benefits only to employees regularised on or before 31.12.2020.
The aggrieved employees approached the Writ Court, which directed the Bank to treat maternity leave as continuous service and grant them retrospective benefits. The Bank challenged the decision through intra-court appeals before the Division Bench.
Court’s Decision
The High Court upheld the Writ Court’s decision and dismissed the appeals filed by the Bank.
The Court observed that the respondents were otherwise fully eligible for regularisation and that the only reason for delayed regularisation was the exclusion of the maternity leave period from continuous service.
The Bench held that such exclusion effectively penalised women employees for motherhood and created hostile discrimination against them when compared to male employees or female employees who had not availed maternity leave.
Referring to Articles 15(3) and 42 of the Constitution, the Court emphasised that constitutional protections and labour welfare laws seek to safeguard maternity rights and ensure humane working conditions for women.
The Court relied upon the Supreme Court decisions in and , which recognised maternity benefits as essential for enabling women to continue in the workforce with dignity.
The Bench strongly criticised the Bank’s conduct and observed that a large public institution should act as a model employer rather than adopting an approach that disadvantages women employees because of childbirth.
The Court also rejected the Bank’s argument based on acquiescence, holding that constitutional rights cannot be waived merely because employees initially accepted their regularisation orders.
Conclusion
The judgment reinforces the constitutional commitment to gender equality and maternity protection in employment. The High Court made it clear that maternity leave cannot be treated as a disadvantage while determining service benefits and regularisation. The ruling also highlights that employers must adopt a fair and sensitive approach towards women employees instead of treating motherhood as an interruption in service.
Case Details
Case Title: Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. and Ors v. Tanu Gupta and Ors.
