The Bombay High Court has ruled that maternity benefits cannot be claimed once a contractual appointment ends and no employer-employee relationship remains. The decision came while denying relief to an assistant professor whose suburban Mumbai college refused her maternity leave and benefits.
A division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe set aside a July 2025 order from the assistant labour commissioner. That order had directed the college to pay Rs 2,43,500 in maternity benefits and to avoid terminating the woman’s services during the leave period. The court held that entitlement to maternity leave must be assessed under the law and the specific terms of employment.
The bench acknowledged that a woman employee’s right to maternity leave protects the dignity of motherhood and the health of mother and child. It added that the importance of such benefits cannot be understated. However, the court observed that the woman sought benefits after her contractual appointment had expired. It questioned in what capacity she could claim them once she had ceased to be a contract employee.
The woman had been appointed on an ad-hoc basis as an assistant professor from June 2023 to April 2024. In March 2024 she applied for maternity leave starting June 14, with her expected delivery date listed as July 18, 2024. The college maintained that she could not claim benefits after her contract ended and that her appointment had simply run its course without renewal.
The college stated that after the contract expired, the woman inquired about a fresh appointment for the next academic year. It replied that any decision would be made in June and that maternity benefits would be considered only if she were reappointed. She was not offered the new position because she could not resume duties after giving birth in June. In October 2024 she filed a complaint alleging unlawful termination and denial of benefits.
The high court noted that maternity benefits arise during an ongoing employer-employee relationship. In this case the woman delivered her baby in June after her ad-hoc contract had ended, leaving no such relationship. The bench further observed that she was not dismissed during pregnancy and that her appointment concluded naturally. The college had neither terminated her early nor refused renewal because of her pregnancy. The end of service resulted solely from the expiry of a fixed-term contract, not from any punitive action. The court therefore held that she was not entitled to the claimed maternity leave and benefits.
