Team Goemkarponn
PANAJI: Regardless of whether an employee is appointed permanently or temporarily, the High Court of Bombay at Goa has decided that maternity leave is a legal need that takes precedence over any conflicting service regulations. The court stated that such benefits cannot be refused due to the type of employment, citing rulings from the Supreme Court.
Dr. Priyanka Amonkar, who earned her postgraduate degree in 2013 and was hired as a senior resident in the pediatrics department at Goa Medical College (GMC) in July of the same year, filed the plea that resulted to the decision.
She requested six months of maternity leave in January 2016, and on February 19, 2016, it was approved ex post facto for the months of January 18–July 15, 2016.
But the leave was given without compensation. When asked why her leave was unpaid, Dr. Amonkar was told that the Goa (Appointment in the post Residents in Goa Medical College) (Second Amendment) Rules, 2013, which were notified on June 19, 2013, required her to serve an extra period equal to her maternity leave after finishing three years as a senior resident.
The authorities were ordered to revoke the February 19, 2016 ruling to the extent that it provided unpaid leave after the High Court ruled in favor of Dr. Amonkar. Additionally, it mandated that the respondents pay her wages for the July 15, 2016, maternity leave period.
In Archana Dahifale vs. State of Maharashtra (2019 (2) Mh L J 697), a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court ruled in 2019 that maternity benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, cannot be denied on the grounds that an employee’s appointment is temporary or ad hoc. This was the ruling that Dr. Amonkar had cited.
Given that the Act is designed to safeguard working mothers’ rights, the court reiterated that no female employee may be refused maternity benefits due to the nature of her job.
