Take the pledge to vote

For a better tommorow#AajSawaroApnaKal
  • I agree to receive emails from News18

  • I promise to vote in this year's elections no matter what the odds are.
  • Please check above checkbox.

    SUBMIT

Thank you for
taking the pledge

Vote responsibly as each vote counts
and makes a diffrence

Disclaimer:

Issued in public interest by HDFC Life. HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited (Formerly HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited) (“HDFC Life”). CIN: L65110MH2000PLC128245, IRDAI Reg. No. 101 . The name/letters "HDFC" in the name/logo of the company belongs to Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited ("HDFC Limited") and is used by HDFC Life under an agreement entered into with HDFC Limited. ARN EU/04/19/13618
LIVE TV DownloadNews18 App
»
1-min read

Uttarakhand HC Declares Govt Rule Denying Maternity Leave for Third Child Unconstitutional

Urmila Manish was denied maternity leave on the ground that she already has two children and could not be granted the same for her third child in consonance with the the Second Proviso of Fundamental Rule 153.

PTI

Updated:August 4, 2018, 3:49 PM IST
facebookTwitterskypewhatsapp
Uttarakhand HC Declares Govt Rule Denying Maternity Leave for Third Child Unconstitutional
Representative Image. (Photo Credit: Reuters)
Loading...

Nainital: The Uttarakhand High Court has come to the rescue of a government servant who was denied maternity leave for her third child, terming a state government rule to this effect "unconstitutional".

Hearing a writ petition by Haldwani resident Urmila Manish, the single judge bench of Justice Rajiv Sharma said denial of maternity leave to women for their third child under the Second Proviso of Fundamental Rule 153 of Financial Handbook of the Uttar Pradesh Fundamental Rules, adopted by Uttarakhand, went against the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

The court in its July 30 order said the rule should be struck down as it went against Article 42 of the Constitution, which provides for "just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief", and Section 27 of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.

Taking a humanitarian view, it ordered that the petitioner be granted leave.

Manish was denied maternity leave on the ground that she already has two children and could not be granted the same for her third child in consonance with the the Second Proviso of Fundamental Rule 153.

| Edited by: Padmaja Venkataraman
Read full article
Loading...
Next Story
Next Story

Also Watch

facebookTwitterskypewhatsapp

Live TV

Loading...
Countdown To Elections Results
To Assembly Elections 2018 Results