LI Network
Published on: 22 August 2023 at 15:27 IST
The Madras High Court recently emphasized the importance of recognizing paternity leave as a fundamental human right for both pre-natal and post-natal children, while directing the Tamil Nadu Police to reinstate an inspector who was penalized for taking ‘unauthorised’ leave to care for his wife and newborn child [B Saravanan v. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tirunelveli Region].
Justice L Victoria Gowri conveyed this observation in an order, highlighting that it’s time for policymakers to acknowledge the right to paternity leave as a basic human right for parents of pre-natal and post-natal children.
The Court’s directive aimed to address the case of Inspector B Saravanan, who was penalized for availing leave to support his pregnant wife and newborn child conceived through in vitro fertilization (IVF).
The Court recognized that women undergoing IVF require comprehensive care for a safe delivery, and therefore, Saravanan sought leave to attend to his wife’s needs while discharging his duties as an inspector.
The absence of paternity leave provisions in many states, including Tamil Nadu, was noted, prompting a call for legislation in this regard.
Saravanan, stationed at Kadayam Police Station in Tenkasi District, Tamil Nadu, initially obtained approval for 90 days of paternity leave starting from May 1, 2023, to July 29, 2023. However, the leave was revoked on April 30, a day before its commencement, with a vague justification.
The Inspector approached the High Court, which allowed him time off until May 15 to make a fresh leave request. Eventually, he was granted leave only from May 1 to May 30.
Given his wife’s critical condition during her IVF pregnancy, she gave birth on May 31. Saravanan, having no alternative, took time off to care for his family and sought an extension of his leave. Despite WhatsApp messages to inform authorities of the situation’s urgency, he received a desertion notice on June 22, leading to his suspension.
Saravanan filed a petition seeking the quashing of the desertion notice and his reinstatement, claiming that the notice violated his child’s constitutional right to life.
The Court noted that a TN Police Standing Order permits desertion action against officers absent for over two months. However, in this case, the Court deemed the desertion notice as a “preliminary measure.”
The Court emphasized the role of both parents in pre-natal and post-natal care from a child’s perspective. It highlighted that denying paternity leave violates Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life.
As a result, the Court directed the concerned authorities to provide Saravanan with an opportunity to explain and to reconsider his case, emphasizing the reinstatement of the petitioner within four weeks from the order’s date.
