X v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench), Writ Petition No. 3319 of 2025, decided on 25 February 2026
The petitioner, X, completed her Master of Dental Surgery (MDS) and was appointed as an Assistant Professor at a Government Dental College under the State’s Social Responsibility Service (bond) scheme requiring completion of 365 days of service. During the bond period she became pregnant and sought maternity leave from 1 May 2024 to 30 September 2024. After giving birth, she requested permission to resume duty and complete the remaining bond period. However, the Directorate of Medical Education held that maternity leave could not be counted towards the bond period and imposed a penalty of ₹23,58,403 for failure to complete the service bond. Aggrieved by the penalty and denial of maternity benefits, the petitioner approached the Bombay High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
The Court considered whether maternity leave could be denied merely because the bond scheme did not expressly provide for such leave. It emphasised that maternity protection is closely linked to the right to life and dignity guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Referring to judicial precedents and principles of social justice, the Court observed that maternity leave safeguards the health and dignity of both the mother and the child and ensures proper care during pregnancy and early infancy. The Court rejected the State’s contention that the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 was inapplicable and held that maternity rights cannot be curtailed by administrative schemes or contractual obligations such as service bonds. Penalising a woman for exercising her maternity rights would undermine constitutional protections and gender equality.
The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the order imposing a penalty of ₹23,58,403 on the petitioner. The Court directed the authorities to refund the penalty amount within four months and held that the maternity leave period must be treated as a duty period with payment of salary for that duration. The Court further directed that the petitioner be permitted to complete the remaining bond period after excluding the maternity leave period, or alternatively be issued a bond completion certificate if completion of the bond was not feasible.
Maternity leave forms part of the constitutional guarantee of dignity and health under Article 21. Service bonds or administrative schemes cannot override maternity rights, and any contractual condition that penalises a woman for exercising her right to motherhood is inconsistent with the Maternity Benefit Act and principles of social justice.
Written by Adv. K. Sri Hamsa
