In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court imposed a fine of ₹50,000 on the Delhi government for contesting an order granting maternity benefits to a woman employed as a stenographer on a contractual basis with the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
The Court was hearing an appeal filed by the Delhi government against a Single-Judge’s order passed on October 6, 2023, which granted maternity and medical benefits to a woman named Rehmat Fatima for a duration of 26 weeks. The Single -Judge had declined Fatima’s request for re-engagement as a stenographer on a contractual basis.
The Division Bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Shalinder Kaur criticized the government’s appeal as misconceived and highlighted that the single-judge’s order had rightfully awarded benefits to a dedicated young woman who had served the consumer forum diligently for over five years.
Furthermore, the Court referred to the Delhi government’s promised scheme, the Mukhyamantri Mahila Samman Yojna, which pledges to provide Rs. 1,000 per month to all adult women in the national capital.
Also read: Nitin Khindria joins Omega Seiki Mobility as Head- HR
The Bench expressed surprise at the government’s decision to contest an order granting benefits to a woman, especially considering the publicity surrounding initiatives aimed at promoting women’s interests in Delhi. “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 promised to pay all adult women in the city except those who are tax-payers/government employees or are drawing pension, a monthly sum of Rs.1,000/- in the future 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,” it said.
The government argued that Fatima’s contractual engagement was set to expire on March 31, 2018, and thus, it could not be liable to pay wages for the entire maternity leave period, which extended until August 31, 2018.
However, the Division Bench ruled that, as per Section 5 of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, Fatima’s entitlement to benefits would not cease upon the expiration of her contractual term.
“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,” the Court said.
Consequently, the Appeal was dismissed, and the government was ordered to pay Rs. 50,000 as costs to the woman. The Bench also emphasized that there was no justification for interfering with the order granting maternity benefits to the woman for a period of 26 weeks, as sought.
“We find absolutely no reason to interfere with the impugned order insofar as it directs the appellants to pay to the respondent salary and other monetary benefits for a period of 26 weeks for which period she had sought maternity benefits. The appeal being misconceived is along with all pending applications dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000/. Costs be paid to the respondent within four weeks from today,” the Court said in its order dated March 12.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Appeal with cost.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Yeeshu Jain (ASC), GNCTD, Jyoti Tyagi, Manisha, Hitanshu Mishra
Respondent: Advocates Syed Hasan Isfahani, Syed Mohd. Hassan
Cause Title: Govt. NCT of Delhi Through State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and Ors. v. Rehmat Fatima [LPA 199/2024, CM APPL. 13775/2024, CM APPL. 13776/2024 -Ex. & CM APPL. 13777/2024]
Stay connected with us on social media platforms for instant updates click here to join our LinkedIn, Twitter & Facebook
