The Delhi High Court has called into question the existing government policy that limits maternity leave for female government employees to just two children. The court has urged authorities to reassess the rule’s fairness under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, particularly questioning the implications for the third child and any subsequent children who are deprived of equal maternal care.
During a hearing, a bench comprising Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Girish Kathpalia criticized the rule for its potential to deprive a third child of essential motherly care immediately after birth, highlighting that the physiological and psychological needs of a mother do not change with additional pregnancies. They emphasized that expecting a mother to return to work immediately after delivering her third child was “atrocious.”
The controversy arose from a case involving a woman constable with the Delhi Police who was denied maternity leave for her third child. The woman, who had two children from a previous marriage and one from her current marriage, faced rejection of her maternity leave application due to the existing policy. The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) had earlier ruled in her favor, prompting the police authorities to appeal to the High Court.
The government defended the two-child policy, citing family planning and population control objectives. However, the bench argued that while the policy may be well-intentioned, it should not impinge upon the rights of any child born beyond the first two. They asserted that once a child is conceived, their rights must be protected.
Ultimately, the High Court dismissed the appeal by the police authorities and upheld the tribunal’s decision, urging government authorities to reconsider the sustainability of the restrictive rule. The court’s decision emphasized the importance of motherhood and the need for a supportive environment that respects both the duties and rights of working women.
Also Read
The justices also noted the broader implications of the rule, pointing out that it seemed to discriminate unjustly based on the number of children a female employee has, potentially violating principles of equality and fairness. They highlighted the essential roles of both motherhood and childhood in society and the importance of supporting women in the workforce without forcing them to sacrifice family responsibilities.
