The Delhi High Court recently issued a landmark judgment that pregnancy cannot be treated as a ground to deny public employment to women. This decision came from the case Isha vs Union of India and Ors., which was pronounced on July 25, 2024. This ruling addresses a longstanding issue and sets a precedent for protecting the employment rights of pregnant women.
Case Background
Petitioner’s Challenge: The petitioner, an aspiring constable in the Railway Protection Force (RPF), applied for the position following an employment notice issued in June 2018. Despite being placed on the merit list, she faced denial of appointment because she could not participate in the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) due to her advanced pregnancy.
Physical Test Requirements: The PET included strenuous activities such as an 800-meter run, long jump, and high jump, which the petitioner could not perform because of her condition. She requested a deferment, which was denied, leading her to approach the court.
Court’s Analysis and Ruling
Initial Considerations
Gender Equality Emphasis: The judgment, authored by Hon’ble Ms. Justice Rekha Palli, highlights the importance of gender equality, quoting Ban Ki Moon, the former Secretary-General of the United Nations, to stress that achieving gender equality requires the involvement of everyone, regardless of gender.
Detailed Examination
Application and Merit: The petitioner applied for the position before the deadline and scored 72.67 marks in the Computer Based Test (CBT), well above the cutoff of 64.16. She was scheduled to appear for the PET and Physical Measurement Test (PMT) on April 20, 2019.
Request Denied: Her request to postpone the PET due to her pregnancy was verbally denied by the respondents, leading her to file a writ petition in court.
Court’s Observations and Concerns
Anguish Over Treatment
Lack of Accommodation: The court expressed deep concern over the respondents’ refusal to accommodate the petitioner’s pregnancy, deeming it an unnecessary and unfair obstacle to her employment.
Fundamental Rights Violation: The court highlighted that this refusal violated the petitioner’s fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 16, and 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantee equality and prohibit discrimination.
Legal Precedents
Reference to Previous Cases: The judgment cited the case of Sharmila Yadav v Union of India & Ors., where a similar issue was addressed. The court in that case had ruled that pregnancy could not be treated as a disability or disqualification.
Key Judgment Points
Importance of Gender Equality
Natural Consequences of Pregnancy: The court underscored that pregnancy is a natural consequence of marriage and should not be treated as a hindrance or disability. Every employer, especially the State, should recognize and accommodate the unique challenges faced by pregnant women.
Critique of Respondents’ Approach
Insensitive Attitude: The court criticized the respondents for their insensitive approach towards the petitioner, pointing out that their refusal to defer the PET was counterproductive to the goal of gender equality and inclusion.
Employment Opportunities: The judgment stressed that denying employment opportunities to women based on pregnancy undermines efforts to ensure higher representation of women in all services, including the Armed Forces and Police.
Directives and Outcomes
Immediate Relief for the Petitioner
Permission to Take PET: The court directed the respondents to allow the petitioner to take the PET, PMT, and document verification within six weeks. If successful, she should be appointed with retrospective seniority and other benefits, including 50% of back wages.
Award of Costs: The court also awarded costs of Rs. 1,00,000 to Ms. Arpana, who had recently suffered injuries in the Delhi High Court premises.
Future Implications
Inclusive Employment Practices: The court emphasized the need for all employers to ensure that no woman is denied employment due to pregnancy. Requests for deferment of physical tests due to pregnancy should be favorably considered to promote an inclusive work environment.
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court’s decision is a significant step towards ensuring gender equality in public employment. By ruling that pregnancy cannot be treated as a sickness or a disability, the court has reinforced the rights of women to pursue their careers without facing unjust discrimination. This judgment serves as a crucial precedent for protecting the employment rights of pregnant women and promoting a more inclusive and equitable workforce.
Read More:- RBI Directs Banks to Block Credit for Wilful and Large Defaulters
Income Tax Return Filing in Dwarka
Net-worth certificate in Dwarka
Pingback: New MSME Support Fund Launched in Union Budget 2024-25