PRAKASH PADIA, J.

1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with a prayer to issue a Mandamus directing the respondent No.3/District Basic Education Officer, Bijnor to grant the petitioner maternity leave with honorarium from 30.12.2018 to 31.3.2019. A further prayer is also made to issue a mandamus directing the aforesaid respondents to decide the application submitted by the petitioner on 21.12.2018 forthwith.

2. Facts as contained in the writ petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Anudeshak on 20.07.2013 at Purwa Madhyamik Vidyalaya Gowali Noorpur, District Bijnor. Subsequently, The petitioner was married with one Sunil Kumar on 18.2.2018. Due to wedlock, the petitioner has conceived and to be born a female child. In this regard Doctor advised to the petitioner to take complete bed rest. In this regard an application dated 26.9.2018 was submitted by the petitioner before the Block Education Officer as well as the District Basic Education Officer, Bijnor to grant her maternity leave from 1.10.2018 to 31.3.2019. On the aforesaid application, the District Basic Education Officer, Bijnor granted maternity leave to the petitioner only for 90 days, i.e., 1.10.2018 to 29.12.2018 with honorarium. The request was made by the petitioner to grant her maternity leave for 180 days was ignored by the District Basic Education Officer Bijnor while granting leave for 90 days. No reason whatsoever has been assigned by the aforesaid authority that under which circumstances the request for grant of maternity leave for a period of 180 days was turned down and the maternity leave was granted only for a period of 90 days.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Parliament in the twelfth year of Republic of India has enacted an Act namely Maternity Benefit Act, 1961. The aforesaid Act was amended in the year 2017 known as Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017. By the aforesaid amendment, the period for grant of maternity leave as mentioned in the Act 1961 is twelfth weeks has been increased from 8 weeks to 26 weeks. The provisions contained in the maternity Benefit Act 1961 has been duly adopted by the State Government and the Government issued orders in this regard from time to time. Some of the Government Orders are appended along with the writ petition as Annexure 5.

4. Since the maternity leave for the period of 90 days was only granted to the petitioner, the petitioner submitted a representation addressed to the District Basic Education officer, Bijnor on 21.12.2018, since no order has been passed on the same, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon following judgments in support of his contentions:-

I. Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Female Workers (Muster Roll) and another, (2000) 3 SCC 224.

II. Dr. Shikha Jain Vs. State of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. Higher Edu.Lko. & Ors. Service Bench No.1206 of 2012 decided on 29.8.2012.

III. Dr. Rachna Chaurasiya Vs. State of U.P. and others passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.24627 of 2017.

6. A counter affidavit was filed by the contesting respondents namely respondent Nos.2 and 3. In the counter affidavit, it is contended that the maternity leave was rightly granted only for a period of 90 days since it is not possible in law to grant maternity leave to the petitioner for a period of 180 days in view of the Government Orders dated 20.11.2017 and 3.1.2018.

7. A rejoinder affidavit to the aforesaid counter affidavit was also filed by the petitioner stating therein that the Government Orders dated 20.11.2017 as well as 3.1.2018 appended along with the counter affidavit are not Government Orders but only the circulars which were issued by the respondents. It is further contended that the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of the provisions contained in the maternity Act, 1961 as has been amended by Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017 (hereinafter refer