Maternity Leave Cannot Cost Women Their Role or Promotion, Rules Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that maternity leave cannot result in a woman employee losing her role, professional status or career advancement opportunities, holding that maternity protection extends beyond salary and job designation.

The court said women returning from maternity leave should ordinarily be restored to the same position they held before proceeding on leave. If returning them to the exact role is genuinely impracticable, employers must provide an equivalent position with substantially similar pay, status, seniority, responsibilities and career prospects.

The ruling makes it clear that simply retaining an employee's salary and designation may not be sufficient to comply with maternity protection laws if her duties, authority, reporting structure or professional growth opportunities are reduced.

The Delhi High Court said statutory maternity protection covers the substantive aspects of employment, including the nature of work, grade, functional status, reporting hierarchy, supervisory responsibilities and eligibility for appraisals and promotions.

The court observed that protection under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 cannot be limited only to preventing termination or ensuring that a woman continues to receive the same salary.

According to the ruling, maintaining the same designation and remuneration is necessary but may not be enough if other important aspects of employment are altered in a way that negatively affects the employee's professional standing.

The judgment came in a case involving a Chartered Accountant who alleged that she suffered a professional setback after informing her employer about her pregnancy and later returning from maternity leave.

The employee had been appointed as a manager and later informed her employer about her pregnancy. After taking maternity leave and returning to work, she was informed that her original position was no longer available and was assigned to another department.

She argued that the new assignment was substantially different from the managerial accounting role for which she had originally been hired.

The employer maintained that her salary, designation, seniority and managerial level had not changed.

However, the High Court rejected the argument that maternity protection is restricted to preserving employment, salary and designation alone.

The court held that women returning from maternity leave should ordinarily be reinstated to the same position they held immediately before taking leave.

Where returning to the original role is genuinely not possible, the employee must be placed in an equivalent position with substantially the same pay, status, seniority, responsibilities, managerial authority, decision-making powers, promotional opportunities and prospects for career advancement.

The court further stated that a reassignment resulting in a material reduction in responsibilities, authority, status or professional growth because of pregnancy or maternity leave should be presumed discriminatory unless the employer can establish compelling and genuine reasons unrelated to maternity.

The judgment also emphasised that maternity protection does not end with the approval of leave and payment of maternity benefits. Meaningful reintegration into the workplace while preserving a woman's professional standing is an important part of workplace protection.

The Delhi High Court also asked the Union government to frame rules and other measures under the Code on Social Security, 2020, to strengthen the implementation of maternity-related workplace protections.

The proposed framework is expected to address issues such as pregnancy-related workplace accommodation, protection of an employee's role and status after maternity leave, lactation support and creche facilities.

The court also called for provisions covering timelines for maternity-related grievances, protection against retaliation and identification of authorities that can hear complaints and provide urgent interim protection where necessary.

The ruling noted that there is currently no comprehensive framework dealing specifically with post-maternity reintegration, continuity of professional roles, protection against post-maternity demotion and preservation of career progression.

The High Court also found that the employer in the case had not complied with statutory requirements related to creche facilities when the required facility was not functional.

The judgment is expected to strengthen workplace protections for women by recognising that professional equality after maternity leave involves more than retaining employment. It also includes preserving the responsibilities, authority, status and career opportunities that existed before maternity leave.