Jammu, Feb 17: A stormy sitting of the Jammu & Kashmir Legislative Assembly on Tuesday saw senior leader and MLA Ranbir Singh Pathania launch a fierce attack on the government over its policy of granting maternity leave without pay to contractual employees, terming the stance “anti-female” and constitutionally untenable.
Raising the issue during proceedings, Pathania described the existing framework — which allows 180 days of maternity leave without salary for contractual staff — as a “grave constitutional betrayal.” He asserted that motherhood cannot be reduced to a contractual concession and maintained that maternity protection is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Invoking the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dr. Kavita Yadav vs. Ministry of Health, the MLA reminded the House that the apex court had unequivocally held maternity benefits to be an intrinsic part of the right to life and dignity. “Motherhood is a right, not a contractual favor,” he declared, drawing sharp reactions from treasury benches.
Pathania further cited ILO Convention No. 183, which mandates cash benefits during maternity leave, arguing that the government’s present policy falls short of internationally accepted labour standards. He accused the administration of claiming to empower women while denying them financial protection during one of the most vulnerable phases of life.
The legislator also stressed that the Maternity Benefit Act, enacted by Parliament, cannot be diluted through departmental communications or financial advisories. “Statutory rights cannot be overridden by internal memos,” he said, adding that selective implementation of maternity benefits had created disparities among employees.
Drawing attention to what he described as a “class divide” within government departments, Pathania pointed out that while National Health Mission workers receive paid maternity leave, other contractual staff are left without income during the 180-day period. He termed the disparity discriminatory and sought uniform implementation of paid maternity benefits across departments.
The debate triggered animated exchanges in the House, with the opposition pressing the government for a clear policy position on extending paid maternity benefits to all contractual employees. The treasury benches, however, did not offer an immediate commitment, even as the issue gathered political momentum inside the Assembly.
With the matter now placed squarely before the government, the controversy is poised to intensify in the coming days, particularly amid wider discussions on labour rights and gender equity in public employment.
