1. Transfer of a female government teacher with a two-month-old infant — Maternity leave denied on technical grounds. (Para 1 , 2 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Raj) 805
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Anoop Kumar Dhand, J.
Suman Meena Wife Of Shri Hemaraj Meena - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of School Education - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19649 OF 2026
Decided On : 29-09-2026
Important Points
The right to motherhood and an infant's right to be breastfed and nurtured are integral to the Right to Life with dignity under Article 21. Consequently, transfers of nursing mothers must prioritize the child's welfare and biological needs over administrative exigencies.
Subject
Service Law - Transfer and Employee Welfare
Act Referred
Headnote
(A) Constitution of India - Articles 21 and 15(3) - Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 - Transfer of female employee - Infant child - Right to Life with dignity - Transfer of a woman employee with a two-month-old infant to a far-off place constitutes a violation of the right to motherhood and the infant's right to be breastfed and nurtured, which are implicit in Article 21 and Article 15(3) of the Constitution (Paras 11, 13) - The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration and for healthy growth, motherly care and tenderness are essential during infancy (Paras 8, 9) - State as a model employer should not break the sacred bond between mother and child through mechanical transfers (Para 13).
(B) Transfer of Service - Scope - Transfer is an incident of service and generally courts do not interfere unless mala-fide or grave hardship is shown; however, exigency of service is not an absolute shield where transfer causes extreme hardship, such as critical medical needs of an infant child (Paras 6, 7).
Facts of the case:
A female Senior Teacher was transferred to a distant location shortly after the birth of her child. The infant, aged two months, is fully dependent on the mother for breastfeeding and requires constant care. Despite representations and the denial of maternity leave on technical grounds, the transfer order was upheld by the tribunal.
Findings of Court:
Forcible separation of a two-month-old infant from the mother due to transfer causes irreparable psychological trauma and health hazards, contrary to the spirit of the Maternity Benefit Act and international conventions on the rights of the child.
Issues: Whether the transfer of a nursing mother with a two-month-old infant is sustainable when balanced against the child's welfare and the mother's constitutional right to dignity under Article 21.
Ratio Decidendi: The right to motherhood and the infant's right to be nurtured are essential components of the Right to Life with dignity. In cases involving nursing mothers, administrative efficiency must yield to the paramount consideration of the child's welfare.
Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions to the respondents to consider the representation sympathetically and a stay on the transfer order for six weeks.
(B) Transfer of Service - Scope - Transfer is an incident of service and generally courts do not interfere unless mala-fide or grave hardship is shown; however, exigency of service is not an absolute shield where transfer causes extreme hardship, such as critical medical needs of an infant child (Paras 6, 7).
Facts of the case:
A female Senior Teacher was transferred to a distant location shortly after the birth of her child. The infant, aged two months, is fully dependent on the mother for breastfeeding and requires constant care. Despite representations and the denial of maternity leave on technical grounds, the transfer order was upheld by the tribunal.
Findings of Court:
Forcible separation of a two-month-old infant from the mother due to transfer causes irreparable psychological trauma and health hazards, contrary to the spirit of the Maternity Benefit Act and international conventions on the rights of the child.
Issues: Whether the transfer of a nursing mother with a two-month-old infant is sustainable when balanced against the child's welfare and the mother's constitutional right to dignity under Article 21.
Ratio Decidendi: The right to motherhood and the infant's right to be nurtured are essential components of the Right to Life with dignity. In cases involving nursing mothers, administrative efficiency must yield to the paramount consideration of the child's welfare.
Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions to the respondents to consider the representation sympathetically and a stay on the transfer order for six weeks.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- administrative law
- constitutional law
- labour and employment law
- practice and procedure
- family law
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ms. Sanskriti Gautam
For the Petitioner: Ms. Sanskriti Gautam
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner argued transfer causes grave hardship to nursing mother and infant; authorities relied on service exigency and prior maternity leaves. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 )
3. Transfer causing extreme hardship to a nursing mother of an infant violates welfare principles and constitutional rights under Article 21. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 )
4. Right of infant to motherly care and breastfeeding is implicit in Article 21 and Article 15(3) of the Constitution. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 )
5. Writ disposed of — Directing sympathetic consideration of representation, staying transfer for six weeks, and suggesting policy formulation. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 )
6. Can a female employee with an infant child be transferred to a far-off place?
No, unless extreme administrative exigency exists; the welfare of the infant and the mother's right to breastfeed are paramount under Article 21. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 )
7. Does the right of an infant to motherly care and breastfeeding have constitutional protection?
Yes, it is implicit in Article 21 and Article 15(3) of the Constitution and protected under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 )
8. Is the State required to have a policy for female employees with infants?
Yes, the court directed the government to formulate a transfer policy or legislation for female employees with recently delivered infants. (Para 17 , 18 )
ORDER :
ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J.
Motherhood is the mother of all civilizations. Family as a social institution is considered as the backbone of the society. No civilization could have passed without recognizing the power of mother and often figuratively projected her as Goddess. A child born to a family sees the world first through the eyes of his/her mother and develops his/her skills through the vision of the family.
“Mother is she who can take place of all others, but whose place no one else can take. The bond between mother and her child is special one. It remains unchanged by time or distance. It is the purest love-unconditional and true. It is understanding of any situation and forgiving any kind of mistakes….”
1. By way of filing the instant writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 15.09.2026, passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), by which the appeal submitted by the petitioner against her transfer order dated 07.07.2026 has been rejected.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Senior Teacher and at the time of passing of the impugned transfer order, she was posted at PM Shri Government Senior Secondary School, Gangapur City, District Sawaimadhopur. However, she has been transferred to Government Girls Senior Secondary School, Masalpur, District Karauli vide impugned transfer order dated 07.07.2026. Counsel submits that the petitioner has given birth to a child on 13.05.2026, only two months before passing of the impugned transfer order dated 07.07.2026. Counsel submits that the petitioner’s child is still an infant and the petitioner would not be in a position to take care of the new born infant at the proposed transferred place of posting. Counsel submits that even the maternity leave was not granted to the petitioner on a technical count that previously on two occasions, the petitioner has already availed maternity leaves from 02.07.2020 to 28.12.2020 and from 13.07.2021 to 08.01.2022. Counsel submits that with regards to the period of the first maternity leave granted to the petitioner, she gave birth to a child, who unfortunately passed away shortly thereafter. Even though the petitioner was not having two children at the time of birth of the new born baby in May, 2026, since the first child passed away soon after birth i.e. on 02.07.2020, but on the ground of technical reasons of having already availed two maternity leaves, this time maternity leave was not granted to the petitioner. Counsel submits that on humanitarian grounds, a prayer was made before the Tribunal for staying the transfer order and quashing the same, but instead of looking into the aforesaid grounds, the appeal submitted by the petitioner against the impugned transfer order has been rejected. Hence, interference of this Court is warranted.
3. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record.
4. It is submitted that the petitioner has recently delivered a child and is presently having a two-month-old infant in her lap, who is fully dependent on the petitioner for breast feeding. The newly born baby is under intensive care and requires constant motherly care and attention. Despite bringing these facts to the notice of the respondents, the respondents have transferred the petitioner to a far off place from her present place of posting vide impugned transfer order dated 07.07.2026, which is not only against the Transfer Policy of the State Government but also against the principles of humanity and Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
5. It is further submitted that the petitioner has already submitted a representation and the same is lying pending for consideration before the competent authority.
6. It is a settled position of law that transfer is an incident of service and is an exigency of service. Ordinarily, Courts are reluctant to interfere unless mala-fide or gr
