HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 14521 of 2025 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Yatindra, learned counsel for respondent-BSA and learned Standing Counsel for the State. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition challenging an order dated 16.06.2025 passed by respondent no. 3, vide which the claim for maternity leave of the petitioner has been rejected by a non-speaking order. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher in Primary School, Palanpur, Block- Dhanora, District-Amroha, by order dated 30.12.2015. Pursuant to the said appointment, the petitioner joined her services on 31.12.2015. Prior to her appointment as Assistant Teacher, the petitioner was blessed with one girl child, namely, Aarya. After her appointment as Assistant Teacher, second child was born in the year 2018, and she took her first maternity leave for the period 06.09.2018 to 05.03.2019. Now, the petitioner has again conceived and after eight months of pregnancy, she has applied for maternity leave through online application dated 19.05.2025 for the period 16.06.2025 to 12.12.2025, which has been rejected by the order impugned dated 16.06.2025 without paying regard to the settled law on the issue. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner's application has been rejected without considering the fact that the petitioner is entitled for the said leave in view of the settled law as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of K. Umadevi v. Government of Tamil Nadu & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 2526 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 20178 of 2022), and by this Court in the cases of Smt. Neelam Shukla v. State of U.P. and Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Yatindra Smt. Aditi Malik .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) others, Writ-A No. 45265 of 2011 : Neutral Citation No.- 2015:AHC:60329. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the order impugned dated 16.06.2025 is quashed. The matter is remitted back to the District Basic Education Officer, Shamli- respondent no. 3 to consider and decide petitioner's application afresh in view of the settled proposition of law, referred to hereinabove, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today. The writ petition stands allowed accordingly. No order as to costs. September 24, 2025 Rahul. WRIA No. 14521 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad