Denial of maternity leave to contractual employees is unjustified without proper reasoning; such employees are entitled to benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.

JUDGMENT :

B.R. SARANGI, J.

By means of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to quash the order dated 07.06.2017 passed by the Under Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, Govt. of Odisha, under Annexure-1, by which sanction of maternity leave has been denied on the ground that she is not entitled to get such benefit in terms of the Agreement executed with the Department for her professional service.

2. The factual matrix of the case, in a nutshell, is that the Government in General Administrative Department issued an Office Memorandum in the nature of advertisement in daily newspaper inviting applications from various eligible candidates for the post of Young Professionals (YPs) to be engaged in the Administrative Department or they may authorize their sub-ordinate offices for engagement. Pursuant to such advertisement, the petitioner, being eligible, applied for the post of Young Professionals. After following due procedure of selection, she was selected and was appointed as Young Professional. The name of the petitioner was sponsored by the G.A. Department to be posted under the Health and Family Welfare Department. Accordingly, she joined under the Health and Family Welfare Department on 20.05.2014. The Health and Family Welfare Department initially entered into an agreement with the petitioner for engagement as Young Professional for one year and, as such, on completion of one year, being satisfied with the performance of the petitioner, her service was further extended and un-interruptedly the petitioner was continued as Young Professional under the opposite parties. While she was continuing as such, she was blessed with a female child. On 17.08.2016, the petitioner submitted a leave application before opposite party no.2 for the period from 17.08.2016 to 12.02.2017 on maternity ground incorporating the certificate of doctor, as well as Finance Department Instructions. But, the same was rejected by opposite party no.2 without assigning any reason vide Annexure-1 dated 07.06.2017 stating that she is not entitled to get such benefit in terms of the Agreement executed with the Department for her professional service. Hence, this application.

3. Mr. P.K. Rath, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner, having been engaged as contractual employee, can also avail the maternity leave of 180 days. Therefore, there is no justification at all for denying the claim of the petitioner to avail maternity leave, which is admissible to the petitioner, particularly when the contract is in existence. It is further contended that the State, being a model employer, cannot deny the benefit of maternity leave to the contractual employees, else there will be breach of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It is further contended that the contractual employees are entitled to get the maternity leave at par with their counterparts in the regular establishment and, as such, the benefit so admissible cannot be denied to such employees. More so, Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 entitles the said benefit to the petitioner and, as such, the same having been rejected, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

To substantiate his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll), (2000) 3 SCC 224 : 2000 SCC (L&S) 331.

4. Mr. S. Rath, learned Addl. Standing Counsel appearing for the State-o