Allowed

Ruchika Arora v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 Oct 2021CW/11738/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the writ petition, quashing the rejection of the petitioner's maternity leave application. Relying on Division Bench precedents regarding the interpretation of Rule 103 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, the court directed the respondents to approve the leave and grant consequential benefits within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

The withdrawn rejection order quashed. Petitioner directed to be granted maternity leave and consequential benefits within three weeks.

Ruchika Arora Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11738/2019

¶3

Ruchika Arora D/o Shri Ashok Kumar Arora, Aged About 24 Years, R/o 424, Scheme No. 8, Gandhi Nagar, Alwar, Rajasthan.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Education Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner (Raj.)

¶8

The District Education Officer, Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶9

The Chief Block Education Officer, Samdari, District Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶10

Peeo Govt. Senior Secondary School, Nvodo Vera, Samdari Station, District Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tanwar Singh Rathore. For Respondent(s) : Mr. G.S. Chauhan for Mr. K.K. Bissa.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

¶14

Order

¶15

05/10/2021

¶16

Application for early listing of the writ petition is allowed. The matter is taken up for orders.

¶17

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 18.07.2019 (Annex.2), whereby, her application for grant of maternity leave has been rejected with reference to provisions of Rule 103 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment

¶19

(2 of 3)

¶20

[CW-11738/2019]

¶21

in the case of Smt. Neeraj v. State of Rajasthan : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4384/2020 decided on 07.12.2020 and affirmed by Division Bench in State of Rajasthan v. Smt. Neeraj (DBSAW No. 376/2021) decided on 04.08.2021.

¶22

The Division Bench in the case of Smt. Neeraj held as

¶23

under:-

¶24

“We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge that since it is a beneficial legislation and if a female government servant is giving birth to a child within the stipulated period of confinement i.e. 15 days before to three months after the birth of the child, she will be entitled to maternity leave. The argument of the learned Additional Advocate General that the respondent was not a Government Servant at the time of delivery of a child has no merit and therefore, the same is liable to be rejected in the light of the discussions made hereinabove. It is reiterated that the purpose and intention of the rulemaking authority is to facilitate the female government employees by extending the benefit of maternity leave at the time of delivery of the child. In view of the discussions made above, the judgment dated 07.12.2020 passed by learned Single Judge is upheld and the appeal is dismissed being bereft of merit.”

¶25

Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to contradict the fact that the rejection made only on account of interpretation of Rule 103 is contrary to the Division Bench decision.

¶26

In that view of the fact that the order dated 18.07.2019 (Annex.2) passed by the respondents is quashed and set-aside. The respondents are directed to decide the application of the petitioner and grant her consequential benefits in terms of the judgments of this Court in the case of Smt. Neeraj (S.B.& D.B. Both).

¶27

(3 of 3)

¶28

[CW-11738/2019]

¶29

Needful may be done within a period of three weeks from the date a copy of this order is placed by the petitioner alongwith both the judgments before the competent authority.

¶30

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶31

133-Rmathur/-

Ruchika Arora v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ruchika Arora v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deva Ram Bhel Vs the State of Rajasthan

Deva Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan

Shila Kumari Meena Vs the State of Rajasthan

Dilbag Singh Vs State and Ors.

Gautam Lal Dodiyar Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajesh Kumar Rathore Vs State of Rajasthan