Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MRS. ANIMA GOEL versus HARYANA STATE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOA

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Mrs. Anima Goel v. Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Boa - CWP-677-2004 [2006] RD-P&H 10376 (13 November 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Writ Petition No.677 of 2004

Date of decision : 17.11.2006.

...

Mrs. Anima Goel

................ Petitioner

vs.

Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board .................Respondent

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M. Kumar

Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.N. Aggarwal

Present: Sh. O.P. Sharda, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Sh. G.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate for

Sh. Sandeep Godara, Advocate for the respondent.

...

M.M. Kumar, J. (Oral)

The instant petition is directed against orders dated 5.9.2001 (Annexure P-4), 8.4.2002 (Annexure P-6) and 22.9.2003 (Annexure P-10), declining the request of the petitioner to grant her the benefit of maternity leave. It is undisputed that the petitioner has been working as a Data Entry Operator with the respondent. Initially she was employed on daily wage basis w.e.f. 1.9.1995. Thereafter, w.e.f.

1.12.1995 she became a contractual employee. The petitioner has placed reliance on Section 5 of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 and has submitted that she is entitled to the maternity leave benefit. The aforementioned fact that she has been working with the respondent on daily wage basis and contractual basis has remained undisputed.

However, the request made by the petitioner has been rejected by the aforementioned orders Annexures P-4, P-6 and P-10.

The issue raised in the instant petition as to whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Section 5 of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 has already been decided by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Female Workers (muster Roll) and another 2000 (2) RSJ 131. The aforementioned view has been followed by this Court in the case of Smt. Vandana Sharma and another vs. State of Haryana and others (CWP No. 5518 of 2002 decided on 11.4.2002) and other number of petitions. Therefore, the writ petition deserves to be allowed.

In view of the above, the writ petition succeeds and the orders dated 5.9.2001 (Annexure P-4), 8.4.2002 (Annexure P-6) and 22.9.2003 (Annexure P-10) are hereby quashed. The respondent is directed to extend the benefit of maternity leave to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

A copy of the order be given dasti on payment of usual charges.

( M.M. Kumar )

Judge

( S.N.Aggarwal )

Judge

17.11.2006.

chug


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.