The HP High Court has directed the Chief Secretary to incorporate provision for grant of paternity leave to male contractual employees in the relevant rules so as to curtail litigation in this regard.
The court passed this judgment on a petition filed by Munish Patial alleging therein that his application for paternity leave was rejected by the Director, Technical Education Vocational & Industrial Training, Himachal Pradesh, on the ground that he was not a regular employee at that time.
While setting aside the rejection order, Justice Sandeep Sharma observed that “when wife of the petitioner gave birth to child, services of the petitioner were on contract basis, but at the time of his applying for paternity leave, he stood regularised as Assistant Professor (ECL). Admittedly, the petitioner applied for paternity leave on July 27, 2024. However, his prayer was rejected on August, 5, 2024. True, at the time of delivery of child, the petitioner was not a regular employee, but admittedly, when he applied for paternity leave, he was regularised. If it is so, action of respondents, in denying paternity leave, cannot be said to be valid.”
Passing this order, Justice Sandeep Sharma, relying on earlier judgment passed by the court, observed that “every female employee and male employee, whether appointed on regular basis, contractual basis, ad hoc basis, tenure/temporary basis, has a fundamental right to reasonable duration of maternity leave as well as paternity leave, child care leave (CCL) to promote motherhood and child care under Article 21 of Constitution of India read with Article 42 of the Constitution of India.”
The court further ordered that in view of the aforesaid legal position, action of respondents in denying paternity leave to the petitioner is not sustainable.
Allowing the petition, the court observed that “taking note of the fact that issue of maternity leave to female contractual employees has been already addressed by the state by issuing notification in this regard, the Chief Secretary should incorporate provision for grant of paternity leave to male contractual employees in the relevant rules.”
The court directed the state government to file compliance in this regard within two months.
Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium
Take your experience further with Premium access.
Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Already a Member? Sign In Now