MATERNITY BENEFIT FOR CONTRACTUAL WORKWOMEN AND FIXED TERM CONSULTANTS- APPLICABILITY AND THE NUANCE OF EXTENDED TENURE TO ENSURE BENEFITS.

MATERNITY BENEFIT FOR CONTRACTUAL WORKWOMEN AND FIXED TERM CONSULTANTS-  APPLICABILITY AND THE NUANCE OF EXTENDED TENURE TO ENSURE BENEFITS.

 MATERNITY BENEFITS ACT, 1961 (The Act) – Object of – To safeguard employment of women for the period before and after the birth of a child. An Act to regulate the employment of women in certain establishments for certain periods before and after child-birth and to provide for maternity benefit and certain other benefits.

The benefits under this law certainly should be available to all woman who are employed in any establishment and includes women who are employed on contractual, casual, fixed term including consultant, as the definition of woman, under section 2(0) of the Act means

 

 a woman employed, whether directly or through any agency, for wages in any establishment.

However, neither the woman employee is made aware nor many industry fulfil this obligation, especially when the woman happens to be a contractual, fixed term or consultant employee. In
fact, many industry avoids recruitment of woman and for contractual employees the benefits are deprived, resulting in women losing employment and right to livelihood. There are even instances where a woman employee is conveniently discharged either by asked to go, resignation or -termination of the contract, mid –way through their pregnancy.

In Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll) & Anr 2000 I CLR 879 (S.C.), the Supreme Court has held that the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 are wholly in consonance with the Directive Principles of State Policy as set out in Article 39 and in other Articles, specially, Article 42 of the Constitution of India. It was further held as under:

A just social order can be achieved only when inequalities are obliterated and everyone is provided what is legally due.

 

Women who constitute almost half of the segment of our society have to be honoured and treated with dignity at places where they work to earn their livelihood.

 

Whatever be the nature of their duties, their avocation and the place where they work, they must be provided all the facilities to which they are entitled. To become a mother is the most natural phenomenon in the life of a woman.

 

Whatever is needed to facilitate the birth of child to a woman who is in service, the employer has to be considerate and sympathetic towards her and must realise the physical difficulties which a working woman would face in performing her duties at the workplace while carrying a baby in the womb or while rearing up the child after birth.

 

The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 aims to provide all these facilities to a working woman in a dignified manner so that she may overcome the state of motherhood honourably, peaceably, undeterred by the fear of being victimised for forced absence during the pre-or post-natal period.”

 

These unique principles and the Golden Rules to honour the women with dignity, though reemphasized by several High Court Judgements and despite passage of two decades and evolution of the women empowerment across all fields of the industry, it is an apathy that a woman employed by the National Authority of India, an autonomous body of the Central Government deprives her of the maternity benefits. This is despite intervention by the National Human Rights Commission and finally, the Delhi High Court came to her rescue (2020 LLR 475).

 The Brief:

 This women employee was denied maternity benefits on grounds that employment was only for 2years; she was contractual employee; as per employment agreement she was entitled only to 8 days casual and 15 days sick leave in a calendar year; she will not be entitled to any other leave; she was paid only an honorarium and not salary; there was no relationship of employer employee; dispute if any is to be decided through Arbitrator;

Key highlights of the Judgement:

ü  Held, as per employment agreement, employer is bound to comply with the Act since the Act is applicable to it – Denial by employer is contrary to object of the Act –
 

ü  Contractual employee cannot be denied benefits of the Act – On the basis of short period of employment, benefits under the Act cannot be denied.

ü  National Commission for Women Act, 1990  - This Commission is empowered  under Section 10(1)(e) and (f)  and the, the Act casts a duty on it to investigate and examine all matters relating to safeguards provided for women under the Constitution and other laws       

The National Commission  is empowered to look into the complaints and take suo moto notice of matters relating to and including deprivation of women's right, non-implementation of laws, providing protection to women, to achieve objective of equality and development by taking up matters with appropriate authorities

ü  Hence, jurisdiction of Commission cannot be ousted on the basis of arbitration clause in agreement of employment.   

ü  As far as the period of employment of the respondent no 2 is concerned, if she is otherwise entitled to the benefits under the Maternity Benefits Act, 1961, she could not have been             denied the same only because of her period of employment with the petitioner.

In the result, the High Court dismissed the write petition filed by the National Highways of Authority of India against the women employee and the NWC, while upholding the directions of the NWC to pay to the employee all dues including full maternity benefits.

 

Reference: Labour Law Reporter 2020 LLR 475