GOVT. NCT OF DELHI   [ Appellants]  Vs.  REHMAT FATIMA  [Respondent]

LPA 199/2024, CM APPL. 13775/2024

(2JB, REKHA PALLI and SHALINDER KAUR JJ., delivered by REKHA PALLI J.)

Facts: The present appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent seeks to assail the order dated 06.10.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)13075/2019. Vide the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has partly allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent by directing the appellants to grant her maternity and medical benefits for a period of 26 weeks on account of her pregnancy as per the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.

Issue: Whether the learned single judge has rightly granted maternity and medical benefits to the appellant?

Arguments on behalf of counsel for appellants:

The only submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the term of the contractual engagement of the respondent was expiring on 31.03.2018 and, therefore, the appellant could not be saddled with the liability to pay wages for the entire period of the purported maternity leave availed by her, which period extended till 31.08.2018 i.e., way beyond 31.03.2018. He, therefore, contends that the respondent could, at the best, be paid wages till 31.03.2018 and not for any period thereafter

Arguments on behalf of counsel for respondents:

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned order and submits that the learned Single Judge has rightly allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent by holding that she ought to be released all medical, monetary and other benefits that accrued in her favour on account of her pregnancy, for which she made an application on 28.02.2018 while her contractual engagement was admittedly still continuing. He, therefore, prays that the appeal be dismissed.

Held: The court dismissed the present appeal and held that, “from a perusal of the aforesaid, we find that the learned Single Judge has by placing reliance on Section 5 of the Act come to a conclusion that the benefits payable to the respondent would not come to an end on expiry of the term of her contractual engagement. Having perused Section 5 of the Act, we see no infirmity in the approach adopted by the learned Single Judge. We, therefore, find no merit in the appellant’s plea that the respondent was not entitled to receive any benefits under the Act for the period beyond 31.03.2018, the date when the term of her contractual engagement was expiring. In fact, we are surprised that the Govt. of NCT of Delhi, which is giving great publicity to the steps being taken to promote the interest of women in Delhi and has under its recently announced scheme i.e., Mukhyamantri Mahila Samman Yojna has chosen to file such a misconceived appeal to assail an order which grants the benefits under the Act to a young woman, who has with utmost dedication served in the Delhi State Consumer Forum over 5 years.”