Dr.Madhineni Naga Sravanthi Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

¶1

WP No. 9278 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 16-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

WP NO. 9278 OF 2026

¶7

DR.Madhineni Naga Sravanthi

¶8

Petitioner(s)

¶9

Vs

¶10

1. The State Of Tamil Nadu

¶11

Rep by its Principal Secretary Health and Family Welfare Department Secretariat, Chennai- 600 009.

¶12

2.Directorate Of Medical Education And Research Rep by its Director Kilpauk, Chennai- 010.

¶13

3.Directorate Of Medical And Rural Health Services Rep by its Director, 359, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600 006.

¶14

4.Directorate of Public Health and preventive Medicine Rep by its Director, 359, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600 006.

¶15

5.Government Cuddalore Medical College And Hospital Rep by its Dean, Annamalai Nagar, Chidambaram-608 002.

¶16

6.Government Mohan Kumaramangalam Medical College Rep by its Dean Fort Main Road, Salem- 636 002.

¶17

Respondent(s)

¶18

PRAYER in WP No. 9278 of 2026: Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, directing Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 to recognise and give effect to the petitioner entitlement to maternity leave and , consequently, treat the petitioners bond period as having been reduced by one year, and further

¶19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

WP No. 9278 of 2026

¶21

direct that upon completion of the bond period so reckoned, namely on 03.06.2026, the 6th respondent be directed to forthwith return the petitioners original certificates and documents along with her post Graduate certificate.

¶22

For Petitioner(s): Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy For Respondent: Mr.E.Sundaram

¶23

ORDER

¶24

By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶25

This petition has been filed for a direction, directing Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 to recognise and give effect to the petitioner entitlement to maternity leave and consequently, treat the petitioners bond period as having been reduced by one year, and further direct that upon completion of the bond period so reckoned, namely on 03.06.2026, the 6th respondent be directed to forthwith return the petitioner's original certificates and documents along with her post Graduate certificate.

¶26

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner completed under PG Degree from the 6^th respondent college. At the time of admission, being a nonservice candidate, she executed a bond of Rs.40 lakhs undertaking to seve the Government of Tamil Nadu for a period of two years upon completion of course. As a condition precedent for admission, the petitioner deposited her original educational certificates with the College. Upon completion of course,

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

WP No. 9278 of 2026

¶29

the petitioner was posted to the fifth respondent college for compulsory bond service for two years and joined duty on 04.06.2025, she has been continuously discharging her duties. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the maternity leave of one year must be treated as part of the bond period, however, orally, the respondents are orally refusing to treat the maternity period as part of the bond service and insists that she must complete the full two year bond period in addition to maternity leave. Hence, seeks for a direction.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).No.860 of 2023 dated 19.06.2025 has caterogically held that maternity leave of one year must be treated as part of the bond period, recognising maternity benefits as flowing from Articles 14 and 21 of the Const' of India and the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.

¶31

Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record.

¶32

As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr.E.Krithikaa vs. State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department and others made in W.A.(MD).No.860 of 2023 dated 19.06.2025

¶33

has held that maternity leave of one year must be treated as part of the bond period, recognising maternity benefits as flowing from Articles 14 and 21 of the

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

WP No. 9278 of 2026

¶36

Const' of India and the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.

¶37

In such view of the matter, this Court directs the petitioner to make a

¶38

representation to the respondents within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order and the respondents, shall consider the representation of the petitioner in light of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Dr.E.Krithikaa (referred supra) and pass appropriate orders on merits within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶39