Mynthiladevi. S v. The Project Officer

W.P.No.43185 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 13.11.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANW.P.No.43185 of 2025 Mynthiladevi. S ....PetitionerVs1.The Project Officer, Tribal Welfare, District Collectorate, Salem District-636001.

The Head Master, Government Tribal Welfare Secondary School, Pagudupattu, Salem District-636001. ....RespondentsPrayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.1213/2025/TA dated 22.10.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to grant maternity leave to the petitioner based on her representation dated 25.08.2025.For Petitioner: Mr.K.T.S.SivakumarFor Respondents: Mr.JeevagiridharanAdditional Government Pleader Page 1 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43185 of 2025ORDERThis Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the first respondent dated 22.10.2025 thereby rejected the application seeking maternity leave. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher on 09.07.2015. After employment, she was conceived for the third time. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a leave application seeking maternity leave. While pending leave application, she delivered a baby on 28.08.2025. However, the leave application submitted by the petitioner was rejected on the ground that she is not entitled for maternity leave benefit for the third child.

This issue already dealt by this Court in W.P.No.33559 of 2025 dated 04.09.2024. The relevant portion of the order is as follows:

11. The very basis for granting such maternity reliefs to the women employees / staffs / officers concerned including the maternity leave and maternity benefits is based on a sound policy that in order to shoulder and withstand the pain and sufferings undergoing by the mother at the time of pre-delivery as well as post-delivery of the child. Page 2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43185 of 202512. When that being so, it does not restrict to first pregnancy or second pregnancy and it cannot be stated that, she would not be entitled to get the relief to third pregnancy which would have no logic at all and thoroughly unreasonable. Therefore, we do feel that, in this case also since the petitioner though has given birth to two children already and she is under third pregnancy now, merely because it is the third pregnancy, such benefits of maternity leave and maternity benefits cannot be denied to the mother.

Therefore, the first respondent ought not to have rejected the leave application seeking maternity leave by relying upon the Government Order in G.O.(MS) No.84 dated 23.08.2021 issued by the Human Resources Management (FR III Department). The above Government Order is only issued for encashment of maternity leave from 9 months to 12 months. It does not say that it is not applicable for third child.