4 months ago
3
The Madras High Court has reiterated that women employees cannot beryllium denied maternity permission adjacent during 3rd gestation and directed the Chief Secretary to circulate its bid among each heads of departments successful the State authorities truthful that they adhere to it scrupulously successful future.
The High Court’s 2nd Division Bench of Justices R. Suresh Kumar and Shamim Ahmed expressed dismay implicit the officials continuing to contradict maternity permission for 3rd confinement contempt aggregate orders passed by the High Court successful favour of assistance of specified payment to women employees.
The judges recovered that adjacent the Registrar (Management) of the High Court had denied maternity permission to tribunal worker P. Mangaiyarkkarasi though the authoritative was informed that the High Court had successful a akin lawsuit ordered assistance of specified a payment during 3rd gestation too.
The Division Bench directed the Registrar General of the High Court besides to circulate a transcript of their bid to each the judicial officers who were the heads of the units successful the territory judiciary passim the State for strict compliance with respect to the tribunal employees.
Allowing a writ petition filed by Ms. Mangaiyarkkarasi, the Division Bench said that successful astatine slightest 2 cases successful the past, the High Court had, relied upon Supreme Court decisions, to regularisation that women employees could not beryllium denied maternity permission adjacent during 3rd confinement.
Though 1 of those decisions was brought to the announcement of the Registrar (Management), the second had interpreted that the judgement would beryllium applicable lone to the litigant successful that lawsuit and not to others. “This benignant of interpretation... cannot beryllium appreciated,” the Bench wrote.
Authoring the verdict for the Division Bench, Justice Kumar said, the judgements delivered by the High Court successful those 2 cases could lone beryllium considered arsenic an bid in rem (applicable successful wide to all) and not in personam (applicable to a peculiar individuals).
“When 2 Division Benches successively passed orders connected the aforesaid contented with the akin facts... we expect the contiguous respondents, i.e., the High Court Registry and besides the territory judiciary to recognize the ineligible rule enunciated successful those decisions and walk due orders,” the Bench said.
The judges besides acceptable speech the Registrar (Management)’s bid refusing to assistance maternity permission to the writ petitioner and ordered that the second indispensable beryllium extended the benefit, arsenic per her entitlement, for the play betwixt August 8, 2025 and August 7, 2026 with each attendant and work benefits.
