Reproductive rights, population control, and more: What Supreme Court said on maternity leaves in recent ruling
Written by Rishu Jaiswal
The Supreme Court passed a significant ruling on May 23 allowing 'maternity benefit' to a Tamil Nadu-based teacher for her third child under Fundamental Rule 101 (a). The woman — an English teacher at a government higher secondary school — sought relief after her plea was rejected by the Madras High Court.
Fundamental Rule 101(a), pertaining to the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 1961, addresses the eligibility criteria for maternity leave of state government servants in India.
Here's what the Supreme Court said:
# The apex court set aside the judgment declining maternity leave to the school teacher, and said she was entitled to receive maternity benefits despite having two children.
# Maternity leave is integral to maternity benefits and reproductive rights are now recognised as part of international human rights law like right to health, privacy, equality and non-discrimination and dignity, remarked the Supreme Court. While hearing the matter, a division bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan disagreed with the findings of the Madras HC and said, 'Thus, as can be seen…, through various international conventions, the world community has recognized the broad spectrum of reproductive rights which includes maternity benefits.'
# Emphasising on the Article 21 of the Constitution, the top court bench said, 'By judicial interpretation, it has been held that life under Article 21 means life in its fullest sense; all that which makes life more meaningful, worth living like a human being. Right to life includes all the finer graces of human civilization, thus rendering this fundamental right a repository of various human rights. Right to life also includes the right to health. Right to live with human dignity and the right to privacy are now acknowledged facets of Article 21.'
# The Supreme Court also noted that the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017, does not bar maternity leave for women with more than two children, and only limits the duration of leave — 26 weeks for those with up to two children, and 12 weeks for those with more. It said that maternity leave itself is not denied based on the number of children.
# The court also acknowledged the importance of population control measures, and said, 'Population control and reproductive rights are not mutually exclusive goals. They must be reconciled in a rational, humane manner.'
A timeline of the case in SC
The woman started working as an English teacher at a government higher secondary school in Tamil Nadu's Dharmapuri district in 2012.
She had two children from her first marriage, which ended in a divorce in 2017. The kids are in the custody of her former husband.
After marrying again in 2018, she became pregnant in 2021 and applied for maternity leave from August 17, 2021, to May 13, 2022, covering both pre- and post-natal periods. Her application for leave was rejected, and she subsequently filed a case in the high court.
Initially, the case went to a single-judge bench who ruled in her favour and ordered the government organisation to grant her maternity leave.
However, the state government challenged the decision, and a division bench of the HC reversed the decision, prompting the woman to approach the apex court.
— with inputs from PTI
Rishu Jaiswal is an intern with indianexpress.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
35 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
The paradox of English: It is both a foreign tongue and a deeply embedded Indian language
Alongside their offensive against Urdu, India's language nationalists appear to have turned their ire on English. That is what one could conclude from the declaration by Union Home Minister Amit Shah at a book launch in New Delhi on Thursday, when he predicted that 'soon a time would come when those speaking English will feel ashamed'. 'In our lifetime, we will see a society in which those speaking English will feel ashamed, that day is not far,' he said. 'I believe that the languages of our country are the ornament of our culture. Without them, we would not have been Bharatiya. Our country, its history, its culture, our dharma – if these have to be understood, it cannot be done in foreign languages.' Shah's statement quickly sparked a political backlash. Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, countered forcefully: 'English is not a dam, it is a bridge. English is not shameful, it is empowering. English is not a chain – it is a tool to break the chains.' Other opposition figures, including Trinamool Congress leaders Derek O'Brien and Sagarika Ghose, echoed this sentiment, slamming the home minister for what they saw as a regressive and divisive stance. Echoes of Mulayam Singh Shah's remarks recall a moment 35 years ago when Mulayam Singh Yadav, who was then chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, launched his own crusade against English. In May 1990, Yadav infamously declared English to be 'the language of foreigners and the elite', blaming it for perpetuating socio-economic disparity and cultivating feelings of inferiority among non-English speakers. His one-point mission: Angrezi hatao. Banish English. In a curious twist, Yadav, a self-declared supporter of Urdu urged Urdu-speaking communities to unite with Hindi speakers to oppose English. Urdu, having only recently been granted official status as Uttar Pradesh's second language, was now being weaponised against a new linguistic rival. This contradiction is not out of character for Indian politics, where language often becomes a proxy for identity, power and culture. The disdain for English in some Indian political circles can be traced back to the 1950s and '60s, to socialist leader Ram Manohar Lohia and even earlier, to Mohandas Gandhi and the Indian National Congress. Gandhi viewed English as an alien imposition that had displaced indigenous languages from their rightful place in Indian society. At Independence, the Indian Constitution made Hindi the official language, but allowed English to continue for a transitional period of 15 years. This compromise was pragmatic, not sentimental. English was seen as a necessary link language in a culturally and linguistically diverse nation. However, the efforts to impose Hindi on South India in the 1960s sparked widespread resistance and deepened the North-South linguistic divide. Even today, English continues to be viewed by many as a colonial vestige, despite its extensive indigenisation. The Lohia doctrine Lohia considered English to be not just a colonial leftover, but a barrier to original thought and mass education. He argued that true educational reform and people-oriented governance were possible only if conducted in the people's languages. Recognising India's cultural diversity, Lohia made exceptions for South Indian states, allowing them to retain English for inter-state and central communication for 50 years. However, his nuanced vision was distorted by his followers. The anti-English frenzy gained renewed vigour in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, leading to draconian steps like removing English from school curricula altogether. In Bihar in the 1970s, Chief Minister Karpoori Thakur reduced English to an optional subject, resulting in a generation of students branded as the 'Karpoori class' – matriculates without English proficiency. Mulayam Singh Yadav resurrected the campaign in the 1990s, giving it a political legitimacy that had long-lasting social consequences. Misplaced stereotypes Yadav's campaign also triggered unwarranted attacks on Christian institutions, which were accused of using English as a tool for religious conversion and elitist education. This conflation of English with Christianity mirrors the equally irrational equation in the Hindi heartland of Urdu with Islam. Such logic ignores the complex realities of Indian linguistic identity. English may have arrived with colonial Christians, but it soon became a key vehicle for political awakening and nation-building. It was through English that India's founding leaders – from Raja Rammohun Roy to Nehru – engaged with global currents of nationalism, democracy, liberty and modernity. The same language, intended by the British to produce obedient clerks, ended up producing freedom fighters, thinkers and reformers who led India's struggle for independence. More Indian than foreign? Despite its origins, English in India has long shed its colonial skin. It is the medium of scientific advancement, legal systems, administrative governance and higher education. It has played a vital role in the country's post-Independence progress – particularly in the globalisation era. Ironically, many politicians who publicly denounce English still prefer to send their children to English-medium schools. Even in the Hindi heartland, English remains a key administrative language. Today, English enjoys a paradoxical status: both a foreign tongue and a deeply embedded Indian language. English is also the mother tongue of the Anglo Indian community, a recognised minority in India, and serves as an official language in states like Nagaland. As globalisation continues to shape India's economic and cultural landscape, English remains the country's primary interface with the world. To treat it as a threat to Indian identity is to ignore the multifaceted reality of modern India. Language should be a medium of unity, not a tool of discord. English, like all Indian languages, must be valued for its integrative potential, not vilified for its past. The country does not need another round of linguistic chauvinism. Instead, India should recognise the multilingual richness of English – and the maturity to embrace it.
The Hindu
39 minutes ago
- The Hindu
MDMK will seek more seats but not at the cost of coalition, says Durai Vaiko
The Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (MDMK) will seek a higher share of seats in the upcoming elections but without compromising on the collective interests of the DMK-led alliance, said the party's principal secretary and Tiruchi MP Durai Vaiko on Saturday. 'A party must win at least 12 Assembly seats to secure official recognition. We certainly want to grow and will seek more seats, but any decision will be taken in a manner that does not disrupt alliance unity,' he said speaking to reporters here. Commenting on recent remarks made by Union Home Minister Amit Shah on the English language, he criticised the BJP's stance as regressive. 'It is bilingual education and English that have enabled Tamils to find employment across the world. The BJP insists on a third language in schools, yet questions the role of English — this contradiction is unconvincing,' he said.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Israel says Iran's nuclear plans set back by two years: Reports
Israel said on Saturday that its military operations have delayed Iran's suspected nuclear programme by at least two years, South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported. The statement came a day after US President Donald Trump warned that Iran has no more than two weeks to avoid possible American air strikes. Trump said he is still deciding whether to involve the United States in Israel's military campaign. 'Iran doesn't want to speak to Europe. They want to speak to us. Europe is not going to be able to help in this,' Trump told reporters, according to the SCMP. He added that he is unlikely to ask Israel to stop its attacks, saying, 'If somebody's winning, it's a little bit harder to do.' Israel on the other hand claimed to have carried out further air strikes on missile storage and launch sites in central Iran. Israel said the attacks aim to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons, though Iran denies seeking to build such weapons. Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Saar told Germany's Bild newspaper, as reported by SCMP, 'According to the assessment we hear, we already delayed for at least two or three years the possibility for them to have a nuclear bomb.' He said the attacks would continue, adding, 'We will do everything that we can do there in order to remove this threat.' European diplomats have been trying to restart talks with Iran. Officials from Britain, France and Germany met Iran's deputy foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, in Geneva and urged Iran to return to negotiations with the United States. France's Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said, as reported by the SCMP, 'We invited the Iranian minister to consider negotiations with all sides, including the United States, without awaiting the cessation of strikes, which we also hope for.' Araghchi told NBC News after the meeting, 'We're not prepared to negotiate with them any more, as long as the aggression continues.' The SCMP said that any American involvement would likely involve 'bunker-buster' bombs to target Iran's underground uranium enrichment plant at Fordo. Shops and markets in Tehran were mostly closed on Friday. Iran has not updated its official death toll since Sunday, when it said at least 224 people had been killed. A US-based group, the Human Rights Activists News Agency, said at least 657 people had died, including 263 civilians. Since Israel began its attacks on June 13, Iran has fired missiles and drones at Israel. Israeli officials said 25 people have been killed. A hospital in Haifa reported 19 injuries from the latest attacks. Britain's Foreign Secretary David Lammy said it was important to avoid the conflict spreading further. The Arab League and Organisation of Islamic Cooperation held talks on the situation. Switzerland announced it is closing its embassy in Tehran for now but will continue to represent US interests there.
