The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961

The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 was enacted to regulate the employment of women before and after childbirth and to ensure they receive maternity benefits. The primary objective of the Act is to protect the dignity of motherhood by providing financial and medical support to women during pregnancy and post-delivery. Before the enactment of this legislation, there was no comprehensive law granting maternity benefits to women workers in India.

The Act extends to factories, mines, plantations, and other establishments where ten or more people are employed, including government institutions. State governments, with the approval of the central government, can also extend the Act's provisions to other types of establishments.

Key Provisions of the Act

One of the most significant provisions of the Act is maternity leave. Originally, the Act provided for twelve weeks of maternity leave, but the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017 extended it to twenty-six weeks. However, women who have two or more surviving children are still entitled to only twelve weeks of leave. The 2017 amendment also introduced maternity benefits for adoptive and commissioning mothers. A woman who legally adopts a child below three months of age or a commissioning mother (one who has a child through surrogacy) is entitled to twelve weeks of maternity leave from the date the child is handed over to her.

Another important provision introduced in the 2017 amendment is the option of work-from-home (Section 5(5)). If a woman's job allows it, she can choose to work from home after availing her maternity leave, subject to an agreement between her and her employer. This provision recognizes the evolving nature of work and the increasing participation of women in the workforce.

The Act also mandates that every establishment with fifty or more employees must provide a crèche facility (Section 11A). The crèche must be within a prescribed distance from the workplace, and women employees must be allowed four visits a day, including rest intervals. Furthermore, employers are required to inform women about their maternity benefits at the time of their appointment.

The Act prohibits the employment of women for six weeks immediately following delivery, miscarriage, or medical termination of pregnancy (Section 4). Additionally, a pregnant woman cannot be required to perform any arduous work that could interfere with her pregnancy or cause health complications. This includes work that involves long hours of standing or excessive physical exertion.

Another critical provision is the right to payment of maternity benefits (Section 5). A woman is entitled to maternity benefits at the rate of her average daily wage for the period of her absence. To be eligible, she must have worked at least eighty days in the twelve months preceding her expected delivery date. In the event of her death during childbirth, the maternity benefit is payable to the nominee or legal heir.

Apart from maternity leave, the Act also provides for leave in special cases. If a woman suffers a miscarriage or medical termination of pregnancy, she is entitled to six weeks of leave with wages (Section 9). If she undergoes a tubectomy operation, she is entitled to two weeks of paid leave (Section 9A). Furthermore, if she develops an illness due to pregnancy, delivery, premature birth, miscarriage, or a tubectomy operation, she can avail one additional month of leave (Section 10).

The Act also grants nursing breaks to new mothers (Section 11). A woman who returns to work after childbirth is entitled to two breaks per day for nursing her child until the child attains fifteen months of age.
One of the most protective provisions of the Act is Section 12, which prohibits the dismissal of a woman during maternity leave. Employers cannot discharge, dismiss, or vary the service conditions of a woman during her maternity leave. If a woman is dismissed or discharged while she is pregnant, she is still entitled to maternity benefits unless the dismissal is for gross misconduct. Any woman who is deprived of maternity benefits can appeal to the appropriate authority within sixty days.

The Act also includes penalties for non-compliance. If an employer fails to provide maternity benefits or unlawfully dismisses a woman during maternity leave, they can be punished with imprisonment of up to one year and a fine of up to five thousand rupees (Section 21). Additionally, obstructing an inspector from carrying out duties under the Act is also punishable.

Judicial Interpretations and Landmark Cases

Several important judicial decisions have clarified and expanded the scope of the Maternity Benefit Act.

In K. Kalaiselvi v. Chennai Port Trust, (2013) 2 LW 530, the Madras High Court ruled that a commissioning mother (a biological mother who uses a surrogate) must be treated on par with an adoptive mother and is entitled to maternity benefits.

The Delhi High Court in Rama Pandey v. Union of India, (2015) 221 DLT 756 dealt with a case where a commissioning mother was denied child-care leave. The court held that all mothers, irrespective of how they become mothers, face similar challenges in raising a child. Denying maternity leave to a commissioning mother, therefore, violates constitutional principles of equality.

A similar issue was addressed by the Bombay High Court in Hema Vijay Menon v. State of Maharashtra, (2015) 3 CLR 904. The court ruled that maternity benefits should not be restricted to biological mothers. It emphasized that motherhood is not just about childbirth but also about child-rearing, and maternity leave should extend to commissioning and adoptive mothers.

In Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Rolls), AIR 2000 SC 1274, the Supreme Court held that female workers on daily wages (muster rolls) are entitled to maternity benefits just like regular employees. The court emphasized that denying maternity benefits based on employment status is unconstitutional and violates Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 42 (Maternity Relief) of the Indian Constitution.

The Himachal Pradesh High Court in Sushma Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2021) 170 FLR 410 reinforced the principle that a contractual woman employee is also entitled to maternity benefits. The court ruled that denying maternity leave to contractual employees would be discriminatory.

A landmark ruling by the Supreme Court in Dr. Kavita Yadav v. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, (2023) addressed the issue of maternity benefits for women on fixed-term contracts. The court held that once a woman has completed 80 days of employment, she is entitled to maternity benefits even if her contract expires before she can avail the full benefits. The ruling clarified that maternity benefits are not dependent on the continuation of employment but on the fulfillment of eligibility criteria.

Conclusion
The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 and its subsequent amendments have played a crucial role in ensuring the well-being of working women and their children. By extending the scope of maternity benefits to commissioning and adoptive mothers, contractual employees, and daily wage workers, Indian courts have reinforced the constitutional mandate of gender equality and social justice.

The Act not only protects a woman's right to maternity leave but also ensures that she is not discriminated against due to pregnancy. The judicial precedents have further strengthened these rights, making it clear that maternity benefits are an essential component of a woman's right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.