Smt. Nagma Chaudhary vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Smt. Nagma Chaudhary vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim order only: Respondent No.2 (District Basic Education Officer, Amroha) directed to appear personally with an affidavit on 19.12.2025 regarding potential contempt proceedings and disciplinary referral; matter listed for 19.12.2025 at 10:00 a.m. sharp. The writ petition itself was not finally decided on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to the grant of the second maternity leave notwithstanding that the interval between her two maternity leaves is less than two years, contrary to the two-year-gap condition cited in the Director General's letter dated 21-08-2024 and the Government Order. +1 more

Court's answer

On perusal of the record, the petitioner had become entitled to the second maternity leave in terms of this Court's rulings (including Smt. Anupam Yadav, Writ A No.9535 of 2022, that no two-year gap between two maternity leaves is required), but her application has been rejected in violation of the law laid down by this Court from time to time.

Ratio / Principle

The Court is of the prima facie opinion that the rejection of the petitioner's claim for grant of second maternity leave, as well as the instructions dated 15.12.2025 provided on behalf of the respondents, are both contemptuous in nature.

Key takeaways

Respondent No.2, the District Basic Education Officer, Amroha, is directed to appear before this Court with a personal affidavit on 19.12.2025, explaining why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him and why the matter should not be referred to the State Government for disciplinary action for non-compliance of this Court's orders passed from time to time.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ - A No. 18243 of 2025 (Allahabad High Court, Hon'ble Prakash Padia, J., 16.12.2025): Smt. Nagma Chaudhary challenged the order dated 12.11.2025 of the District Basic Education Officer, Amroha (Respondent No.2) rejecting her application for grant of (second) maternity leave on the ground that, per the Director General (School Education), U.P. letter no. 4632/2024-25 dated 21-08-2024 and the Government Order, the required two-year interval between her two maternity leaves did not exist (annexure also cited as incomplete). Noting that this Court has repeatedly held, including in Smt. Anupam Yadav vs. State of U.P. and 2 others (Writ A No.9535 of 2022, decided 21.10.2022), that there is no requirement of a two-year gap between two maternity leaves, the Court found that the petitioner had become entitled to the second maternity leave but was refused it in violation of that law. The Court expressed the prima facie opinion that both the rejection and the respondent's fresh instructions dated 15.12.2025 were contemptuous in nature, and directed the DBEO, Amroha to appear personally with an affidavit on 19.12.2025 to explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him and why the matter should not be referred to the State Government for disciplinary action. Matter listed for 19.12.2025 at 10:00 a.m.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - A No. - 18243 of 2025

Smt. Nagma Chaudhary

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

		.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Kuldeep Singh Prasad	Tomar, Rajeshwari
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C., Nagendra	Kumar Pandey
Court No.- 2

HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

Order dated 12.11.2025 passed by the Respondent No.2 namely District Basic Education Officer, Amroha by which the application for the grant of maternity leave was rejected is under challenge.

The aforesaid application was rejected on the following grounds:-

" संलग्नक नहीं/ अपूणर् - महािनदेशक स्कूल िशक्षा उ०प्र० के पत्रांक संख्या 4632/2024-25 िदनांक 21-08-2024 व शासनादेश िदनांक 03 जुलाई 2023 में विणत िनदेर्शानुसार 02 अवकाशों के मध्य 02 वषर् का अन्तर नहीं है।"

Time and again, such kind of orders are coming before this Court having identical questions of law. Large number of judgments were delivered by this Court from time to time stating therein that there is no requirement for the gap of two years between two maternity leave.

Taken into consideration the aforesaid aspect of the matter and on the request made by Shri N.K. Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of aforesaid respondent, time till today has been granted to seek instructions. Today when the matter is taken up, instructions dated 15.12.2025 under the signature of District Basic Education Officer, Amroha/ Respondent No.2 is placed before this Court, the same is taken on record.

In the aforesaid instructions again it is stated that since there is a gap of less than two years between two maternity leaves, the petitioner is not

WRIA No. 18243 of 2025

2

entitled for the second maternity leave pursuant to the letter dated 21.08.2024 written by the Director General and the Government Order dated 03.07.2024, the both are also taken on record.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

From perusal of record, it is clear that inspite of the fact that large number of judgments were delivered by this Court from time to time and in the case of Smt. Anupam Yadav vs. State of U.P. and 2 others along-with connected writ petitions (Writ A No.9535 of 2022) decided on 21.10.2022 it has been held that petitioner became entitled for the second maternity leave but the same has been rejected in violation of law laid down by this Court from time to time.

In view of aforesaid, the Court is of the prima facie opinion that rejection of the claim of the petitioner for the grant of second maternity leave as well as instructions dated 15.12.2025 provided by Shri N.K. Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of aforesaid respondents, both are contemptuous in nature.

In this view of the matter, the Respondent No.2- District Basic Education Officer, Amroha is directed to appear before this Court alongwith personal affidavit on 19.12.2025 explaining the reasons that why the contempt proceedings should not initiated against him and why the matter should not be referred to the State Government for taking disciplinary action against him for non-compliance of the orders passed by this Court from time to time.

List this matter on 19.12.2025. The matter will be taken up at 10:00 a.m. sharp.

(Prakash Padia,J.)

December 16, 2025

Swati

Digitally signed by :- SWATI PATHAK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad