For Rakhi Bisht, returning to work after maternity leave should have meant getting back to the career she had built over 14 years. Instead, when she returned to HashiCorp in July 2024, she found her role had been reassigned.
Bisht, a chartered accountant, had joined the software company as an accounting manager in June 2022, drawing Rs 2.6 lakh a month. After taking maternity leave in December 2023, she returned to find herself placed in the treasury department of the company. The duties assigned to her were traditionally performed by a staff accountant – approximately three levels below her designation – and were clerical in nature.
Bisht resigned in October 2024 and moved the Delhi High Court. She sought Rs 50 lakh as compensation and the formulation of strict anti-discrimination guidelines for private companies.
On August 31, the HC directed HashiCorp to pay Bisht Rs 10 lakh in compensation.
“Under no circumstance, can maternity be allowed to become a source of ignominy at the work place,” Justice Sachin Datta said in his order.
“…a harmonious reading of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 42 (of the Constitution) leaves little room for doubt that pregnancy and maternity cannot be treated as grounds for professional disadvantage, demotion, loss of status, or denial of career progression. Such actions undermine not only the statutory protections available to women employees but also the constitutional commitment to equality, dignity, social justice, and humane conditions of work,” he added.
In her petition, Bisht told the court that she was informed there was no position available for her in her original team. The new role, she said, “bore no resemblance to the managerial accounting position for which she had been hired”.
Bisht said the duties assigned in the treasury department undermined her qualifications, experience and professional standing.
The court noted that “neither the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, nor the Code on Social Security, 2020, expressly prescribes a comprehensive framework for the post-maternity reintegration of women employees”.
It added that the absence of such a framework has the potential to undermine the effective implementation of the constitutional and statutory protections already in existence. “…the law cannot be construed in a manner that allows its substantive guarantees to be circumvented through formal or cosmetic compliance,” Justice Datta said.
The court said a woman returning from maternity leave is “ordinarily entitled to be restored to the post held by her immediately prior to proceeding on such leave”.
“For bona fide and demonstrable organisational reasons, the post is no longer available, she is entitled to be placed in a position as nearly equivalent to it as possible in terms of pay, grade, status, role, responsibilities, managerial authority, and prospects for advancement,” Justice Datta said.
He added that employers must also explain why the earlier position is unavailable and provide details of the alternative role, including its grade, remuneration, reporting relationship and duties. If the woman objects, her concerns must be considered and the employer must communicate its decision with reasons.
The court directed HashiCorp – a private software company recently acquired by IBM – to frame rules or schemes or issue directions covering pregnancy-related workplace accommodation, protection of role and status after maternity leave, lactation support, crèche facilities, timelines for disposal of grievances and protection against retaliation.
The exercise shall be completed within six months from today, it added.
Further, the HC took note of suggestions made by Union government Standing Counsel Ashish K Dixit, including a proposal that the “protected period” for women employees should span from the initial disclosure of pregnancy until six months after she returns to work.
Under these suggested measures, employers would be mandated to conduct individualized assessments within seven days of pregnancy disclosure to provide reasonable workplace accommodations without forcing employees on leave or inferior roles.
Besides Rs 10 lakh as compensation, the court also directed the company to pay Bisht Rs 1.5 lakh towards costs within two months.
“Under no circumstance, can maternity be allowed to become a source of ignominy at the work place,” Justice Sachin Datta said in his order. (Image is generated using AI) 
Share
