Third Pregnancy No Bar to Maternity Leave, Reiterates Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently set aside an order of its own registry rejecting maternity leave to a woman employee for her third pregnancy. Court held that the refusal was legally untenable and in clear disregard of binding judicial precedents that had already settled the issue in favour of granting such benefits.

A division bench of Justice R. Suresh Kumar and Justice Shamim Ahmed allowed a writ petition filed by P. Mangaiyarkkarasi, challenging proceedings dated December 15, 2025, issued by the Registrar (Management) of the high court, which had denied her maternity leave on the ground that the Tamil Nadu Fundamental Rules do not permit such leave for a third child.

The petitioner had sought maternity leave for a period of one year from August 8, 2025, to August 7, 2026, in connection with her third confinement. However, her request was rejected by the registry relying on a clarification issued by the Tamil Nadu Human Resources Management (F.R.III) Department on August 25, 2025, stating that there was no provision for granting maternity leave to government servants for a third child.

As a consequence of the rejection, the petitioner was forced to avail earned leave, medical leave and unearned leave between July 28, 2025, and January 9, 2026. She approached the high court contending that the rejection was illegal, arbitrary and directly contrary to earlier division bench judgments on the same issue.

The bench noted that the issue was no longer res integra, as an earlier division bench of the high court had already allowed a similar claim in W.P. No. 33559 of 2025 on September 4, 2025, following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Umadevi v. Government of Tamil Nadu. Justice R. Suresh Kumar, who was part of that bench as well, observed that the legal principle laid down therein was of general application.

However, in the impugned order, the registry had taken the stand that the earlier judgment would apply only to the petitioner in that case. Court strongly disapproved of this reasoning, holding that the registry had wrongly treated a judgment in rem as if it were a judgment in personam.

The bench pointed out that yet another division bench had reiterated the same principle while allowing W.P. No. 48656 of 2025 on December 17, 2025, under similar circumstances. Despite successive division bench decisions, the registry continued to rely solely on the government’s clarification and reject maternity leave claims for third pregnancies.

“This kind of interpretation sought to be given by the second respondent cannot be appreciated,” the court observed, describing the approach of the authorities as pedantic and legally unsustainable.

Setting aside the rejection order, court directed the respondents to grant maternity leave to the petitioner for the period from August 8, 2025, to August 7, 2026, along with all attendant service and monetary benefits. The bench directed that necessary orders be passed within one week from receipt of the court’s order.

Significantly, court also issued broader administrative directions to prevent recurrence of such disputes. The Registrar General of the Madras High Court was directed to circulate the judgment to all judicial officers heading units in the district judiciary across the state for strict compliance in similar cases.

Further, the bench directed the Chief Secretary to the Tamil Nadu government to ensure adherence to the principles laid down in the Supreme Court’s decision in Umadevi and the earlier high court decisions, and to communicate the order to all secretaries and heads of departments for compliance.

Case Title: P.Mangaiyarkkarasi vs. The Registrar General, High Court of Madras and Another

Order Date: January 21, 2026

Bench: Justice R. Suresh Kumar and Justice Shamim Ahmed