2014 (5) TMI 287 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether a woman employee of the Central Government can ask for uninterrupted 730 days of Child Care Leave - to take care of her son who was in 10th standard. - tribunal directed the respondent to act strictly in accordance with DOPT O.M. dated 11.9.2008 as amended/clarified on 29.9.2008 and 18.11.2008, granting her CCL for the due period. - Held that - As per circulars where all applications for leave cannot, in the interest of public service, be granted at the same time, the leave sanctioning authority may draw up phased programme for the grant of leave to the applicants by turn with due regard to the principles enunciated under the aforesaid circulars. Judgment and order dated 30th April, 2012 passed by the Tribunal affirmed with a direction to the respondents to comply with the directions issued by the Tribunal within three months from the date of receipt/production of this judgment.

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of Rule 43-C regarding Child Care Leave entitlement for a woman employee of the Central Government.

Analysis:
The judgment involved a dispute regarding the entitlement of a woman employee of the Central Government to uninterrupted Child Care Leave (CCL) for 730 days under Rule 43-C of the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972. The appellant initially applied for CCL for six months but later requested two years of CCL due to family circumstances. However, the authorities granted only 45 days of CCL, leading to the appellant approaching the Tribunal, which ruled in her favor. The High Court, on appeal, held that CCL cannot be granted for a continuous period of 730 days but only in spells, with a maximum of three spells in a calendar year totaling 48 days each time.

The Supreme Court analyzed the relevant rules and guidelines issued by the Government of India. It was noted that as per Rule 43-C, a woman government employee with minor children below 18 years can avail CCL for a maximum of 730 days during her entire service period for up to two children. The Court emphasized that CCL could be combined with other types of leave and could be granted beyond 730 days by combining other leave if due. The Court found that the High Court's decision was not based on Rule 43-C or government guidelines, and the Tribunal's direction to adhere to the guidelines was deemed correct.

The Court highlighted that the appellant's request for 730 days of CCL was reasonable, especially to support her son during important examinations. The competent authority had allowed 45 days of CCL without providing reasons for denying the remaining period. The Court emphasized that while leave cannot be claimed as a right, the competent authority can refuse or revoke leave only in exigencies of public service. The Court also noted that government circulars encourage employees to take leave regularly and that a phased leave program can be implemented if all applications cannot be granted simultaneously.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and upheld the Tribunal's decision, directing the respondents to comply with the Tribunal's directions within three months. The appeal was allowed with no costs awarded.