Despite tubectomy, AIIMS employee delivers third baby: Court to take call on maternity leave

The court will now decide if the woman can be denied maternity leave (and other related benefits) if she bears a third child, even after she has undergone sterilisation from a reputed institute such as AIIMS.

Written by Anindya Thakuria | New Delhi | Published:February 26, 2017 4:37 am
AIIMS, AIIMS director, AIIMS jobs, AIIMS director job, medical job, jobs, indian express news, R Chidambaram AIIMS employee demand maternity leave on birth of third child. (File)

A WOMAN employee of AIIMS who underwent a tubectomy at the hospital in March 2013 found herself pregnant with her third child, four months after the procedure. Deciding to keep the child, she applied for maternity leave. However, AIIMS denied her leave stating that it is applicable only for those who have less than “two surviving children”. As a result, the woman ended up exhausting all her earned leaves and went on unpaid leave for four months.

Subsequently, she approached the Assistant Labour Commissioner, New Delhi, who held a conciliatory meeting with the two sides but the matter could not be resolved. He filed a ‘Failure of Conciliation Report’ with the secretary of the union government’s labour ministry. On January 29, the ministry referred the matter to the Karakardooma court.

On February 2, Avtar Singh Dogra — presiding officer in Central Government Industrial cum Labour Tribunal in Karkardooma court — reserved the verdict. The court will now decide if the woman can be denied maternity leave (and other related benefits) if she bears a third child, even after she has undergone sterilisation from a reputed institute such as AIIMS. The woman’s lawyer, Rachitta Priyanka Rai, said, “Sensibilities, priorities and moral values of the claimant did not allow her to exercise the option of abortion and she decided to continue with the pregnancy.”

Watch What Else Is Making News 

The woman said, “I’m happy I had a third child, planned or unplanned, I would not want it any other way after I conceived… Despite the hardship that I faced while running from pillar to post (applying for leave) when I was pregnant, my co-workers were very co-operative and supportive.”

Her baby was born on May 4, 2014.

The woman’s lawyer said, “India being a welfare state, the government ought to adopt a compassionate view… Since family planning scheme is a beneficial legislation, it should not be construed in a narrow or pedantic manner.”

Maternity benefits which the woman is seeking include her salary for four months when she couldn’t attend work due to pregnancy, restoration of her earned leaves, grant of family planning allowance from the time of her pregnancy, and all other benefits that would otherwise be accorded to the child had it been her first or second born. The woman added that her immediate seniors in the hospital said they would sanction the leave if she could show them a rule under which they could grant it.

“But I did not know of any such rule,” she said.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App now

  1. D
    Deeksha Sharma
    Feb 26, 2017 at 1:00 am
    This is the stupidest case to go to the court. Matter could have been resolved within the insute as it was a failure of the insute to do a proper job. A person undergoes tubectomy to have a worry free married life and do away with constant need of contraceptives. It is management who have to take a decision and not the court. What is the Minister of health doing, if I may ask?
    Reply
    1. R
      Rahul
      Feb 26, 2017 at 3:05 am
      The top most priority of bureaucracy in any government department is SAVING THEIR POSITION. For that they stick to the rules due to fear of audits.lt;br/gt;But the irony is that they too bend the rules or even break them only for favor or bribe because favor and bribe somehow compensate them against the fear of audits.
      Reply
      1. R
        Rachitta Rai
        Mar 2, 2017 at 12:37 pm
        Repeated representations were made to AIIMS but the same were denied by AIIMS by quoting the rule which says that maternity benefits are given only for those who have less than “two surviving children”. AIIMS did not appreciate that the failure of the sterilization was solely attributable to them. It was then that the lady had to take legal recourse.
        Reply