The Kerala High Court recently underscored that maternity leave is a part of a woman's reproductive rights, and not just a statutory benefit under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas explained that such reproductive rights have been recognised as fundamental rights. Therefore, the right to maternity leave cannot be clubbed with regular medical leaves that are discretionary, the Court added.
"Reproductive rights of a woman have been recognized as a part of fundamental rights and maternity leave has to be regarded as an aspect of reproductive right ... De hors the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, a woman must be deemed to posses a right to be granted leave during a reasonable period of her pregnancy. This period must also include the time to recuperate," the Court said.
The Court made the observation while granting relief to a female postgraduate medical trainee who faced the cancellation of her candidature after her request for certain leaves was denied.
Notably, the trainee was denied additional medical leave on the ground that the maternity leave she had availed earlier, combined with her other leaves, had exceeded the permissible number of leaves that she could avail under the 2024 rules of the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS).
The Court, on January 20, ruled that maternity leave should not be clubbed in this manner with other medical leaves.
The trainee had joined the DrNB course in Nephrology at Aster Medcity after qualifying the NEET Super Speciality Examination in December 2022.
During her training, she availed 184 days of maternity leave following the birth of her second child, along with some other permissible leaves.
In 2025, she was diagnosed with a serious and aggressive form of blood cancer, requiring chemotherapy and prolonged treatment.
When she sought medical leave for seeking treatment, NBEMS rejected her request, stating that the total leaves availed by her combining her maternity and current request (402 days), would exceed the 365 days of permitted leaves during the training period.
The board warned her that if the leaves crossed beyond one year, her candidature would stand cancelled.
Aggrieved, the trainee approached the High Court challenging this rejection.
The Court observed that when the trainee had joined the course in 2022, another set of leave rules were in force which permitted the clubbing of leaves beyond one year in exceptional cases, such as prolonged illness, subject to the board's approval.
The Court observed that the new 2024 rules, which removed this flexibility, could not be applied rigidly to a candidate who had joined the training during the earlier framework.
"The present rules however, do not take into consideration any exceptional cases like prolonged illness. The petitioner having joined the DrNB course at the time when such exceptional circumstances were made a reason for grant of an extension, she has been put to serious prejudice by virtue of the change of rules," the Court noted.
The Court held that the principle of 'no leave beyond one year' could not be applied mechanically.
"Maternity leave being a right and other leaves being a discretion, this Court is of the view that the maternity leave availed by a trainee like the petitioner cannot be clubbed with the other regular leaves that can be availed by such a trainee," the Court added.
Accordingly, the Court directed the board to permit the petitioner to submit a fresh leave application within ten days and instructed it to consider the application within two weeks, keeping in mind the unique situation.
The writ petition was closed with these directions.
The trainee was represented by advocates George Jacob (Jose) and Roshan Jacob Mundackal.
NBEMS was represented by standing counsel T Sanjay.
Advocate Gopikrishnan Nambiar standing counsel on behalf of the Dean of Aster Medicity.
Deputy Solicitor General of India, OM Shalina appeared for the Union Health Ministry.
[Read Judgement]