In a landmark judgment affirming the rights of women in the workforce, the Orissa High Court has held that a woman employed on a contractual basis is entitled to maternity leave and associated benefits, declaring that the denial of such rights merely due to the nature of employment is contrary to the principles of dignity and welfare.
The ruling came in a case involving Anindita Mishra, who was recruited by the state government on a contractual basis in May 2014. After giving birth in August 2016, she applied for six months of maternity leave, supported by medical documents. Her request was rejected by the state on the grounds that maternity benefits were not extended to contractual employees.
A single-judge bench had previously ruled in her favour in 2022, directing the government to grant her maternity leave. The state, however, appealed the decision.
Hearing the appeal, a division bench of Justices Dixit Krishna Shripad and Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo upheld the earlier order and criticised the state’s stance. “Denying maternity benefits to a woman merely because she is a contractual employee is abhorrent to the notions of humanity and womanhood,” the court said.
The bench stressed that the purpose of maternity leave is to uphold the constitutional and human rights of both mother and child, noting: “The idea of maternity leave is structured on ‘zero separation’ between lactating mother and breastfeeding baby… A lactating mother has a fundamental right to breastfeed her baby… Similarly, a baby has a fundamental right to be breastfed and brought about in a reasonably good condition.”
Quoting from ancient texts, the bench remarked, “Yatra naaryaastu pujyante ramante tatra devatah” — where women are honoured, the gods rejoice — and urged the state to align its policies with ideals that protect and promote the welfare of women, especially in vulnerable employment categories.
Citing Article 10(2) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), which mandates special protection for mothers before and after childbirth, the court reinforced that a welfare state cannot exclude such entitlements based on the nature of employment.
The judgment is expected to have far-reaching implications for the rights of contractual women employees across the country, reaffirming that maternity benefits are not a privilege but a right rooted in constitutional and human values.
