Maternity Leave Of Doctor During Compulsory Service Should Be Counted As Part Of Bond Period: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has ruled that maternity leave availed by a doctor while rendering mandatory service at Government Hospital should be counted towards their bond period.The bench of GR Swaminathan and Justice K Rajasekar noted that maternity leave is integral to maternity benefit and forms part of Article 21. The court thus held that the doctor, though was not in the service of...
The Madras High Court has ruled that maternity leave availed by a doctor while rendering mandatory service at Government Hospital should be counted towards their bond period.
The bench of GR Swaminathan and Justice K Rajasekar noted that maternity leave is integral to maternity benefit and forms part of Article 21. The court thus held that the doctor, though was not in the service of the government as a regular employee, would be entitled to the same treatment as any government employee.
“Maternity leave is integral to maternity benefit and forms a facet of Article 21. The appellant no doubt is not a government employee. She is only obliged to render bond service to the Government of Tamil Nadu for a period of two years. But a regular State government employee is entitled to avail maternity leave for twelve months as per the amended Service Rules. We are of the view that the appellant is also entitled to the very same treatment applicable to any government employee. The fact that the appellant was only in the service of the government without being a regular employee is irrelevant. When the fundamental right of the appellant is involved, she is entitled to the protective umbrella of not only Article 21 but also Article 14,” the court said.
The court was hearing an appeal filed by Dr Krithikaa, who was appointed as Assistant Surgeon at Thittakudi Government Hospital in 2019, after her PG. Krithikaa had completed her PG in MS (General Surgery) at Thanjavur Medical College and as per the prospectus, the candidate was to sign a bond for sum of Rs. 40 Lakh with an undertaking that she would serve the Government of Tamil Nadu for a period not less than two years. As per the bond, she had also submitted her original certificates.
In 2019, Krithikaa reported for duty and served in the hospital for 12 months, following which she took maternity leave for her pregnancy. The respondents later declined to return her original certificates, claiming that she had not completed the bond period.
Krithikaa filed a writ petition, but the same was dismissed holding that she had only worked for 12 months of the bond period.
The court went on to discuss the legal precedents, highlighting the importance of reproductive rights and maternity leave, and noted that the conditions of the prospectus would give way to the rights conferred under the Maternity Benefits Act.
“As per the conditions set out in the prospectus, the appellant has to serve the Government of Tamil Nadu in one of their hospitals for a period of two years. This condition has to give way to the rights conferred on the women under the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961. This is all the more so because the Hon'ble Supreme Court had declared that any woman has a fundamental right to the benefits arising out of her situation of maternity,” the court said.
The court thus held that the period of maternity leave should be included in the bond period and directed the respondent authorities to return the original certificates within a period of 4 weeks.
Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. U. Venkatesh
Counsel for Respondents: Mr. C. Venkatesh Kumar, Additional Government Pleader, Mr. A. S. Vaigunth, Standing counsel
Case Title: Dr.E.Krithikaa v. The State of Tamil Nadu and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 221