SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Raj) 2273

GOVIND MATHUR
Neetu Bohara – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:N.R. Choudhary, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Y.P. Khileree, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - By the order dated 03.11.2003, an appointment was given to the petitioner as Nurse Grade II at the consolidated salary of Rs. 4,500/-. The petitioner availed maternity leave from 01.12.2006 to 14.04.2007. By an application dated 15.04.2007, the petitioner claimed for maternity leave encasement, however, the same was not allowed on the count that the petitioner was employed on contract basis.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Rule 103 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 nowhere makes any distinction in the Government servants so far as maternity leave encasement is concerned. Reliance is placed by learned counsel for the petitioner upon a decision of co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Vimla Rani v. State of Rajasthan & others (SBCWP No. 890/2007) , wherein this Court held that a person employed on contract basis is also entitled to receive maternity leave encasement as per provisions of Rule 103 of the Rules of 1951.

3. On examination of the facts averred in the writ petition, I am satisfied that the controversy involved in this petition for writ is squarely covered by the ratio laid down by this Court in Vimla Rani's case (supra).

4. Accordingly, this




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top