2025:UHC:3085-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSB No. 31 of 2019 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Ms. Neetu Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner through video conferencing. 2. Mr. Yogesh Chandra Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 & 3. 4. Petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor in Women Institute of Technology, Dehradun under TEQIP project, on contract, vide order dated 05.01.2018, and she served in the said capacity till 08.08.2018. Petitioner applied for maternity leave for 26 weeks, effective from 21.08.2018 till 18.02.2019. The said application was submitted by her on 08.08.2018. Petitioner’s request for maternity leave was turned down by the coordinator TEQIP-III, WIT, Dehradun vide order dated 24.08.2018. The order passed by the Coordinator, which is impugned in the Writ Petition, is extracted below- “As discussed with NPIU and Director, I would like to inform you that according to point 18 mentioned in the your engagement letter provided by NPIU, institute can only provide you LWP (Leave Without Pay) except CL.” 5. Petitioner contends that every woman, serving in any capacity under the State, or any Institute, which is funded by the State, or is affiliated to University, is entitled to maternity leave. 6. Petitioner relies upon a judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 54 of 2024 (“Smt. Dr. Deepa Sharma vs. State of 2025:UHC:3085-DB Uttarakhand and Others”). The directions issued in the said judgment are as follows:- “a) Respondents are directed to grant maternity leave to the petitioner with full pay w.e.f. 07.01.2015 to 07.06.2015 within eight weeks from today. b) The respondent-State is also directed to grant maternity leave to all the female employees with full pay for 180 days, even working on contractual basis, ad hoc/tenure or temporary basis. c) The State Government is further directed to grant at least 60 days’ maternity leave to the daily wage female employees working for more than 240 days’ in a block of 12 months calendar with full wages. d) The State Government is directed to provide every establishment to have the facility of crèche having 50 or more than 50 employees with liberty reserved to the mother to visit the crèche/nursing care at least four times daily, including the interval for rest allowed to the employees. e) The State Government is also directed to grant Child Care Leave (CCL) of 730 days’ to all the female employees, whether appointed on regular basis, contractual basis, ad hoc/tenure or temporary basis having minor children with a rider that the child should not be more than 18 years of age or older. The female employees shall be entitled to paid leave equal to the pay drawn immediately before proceeding on leave. CCL can be combined with leave of the kind due and admissible. f) The State Government is also directed to grant 15 days’ paternity leave to a male employee appointed on regular basis, contractual basis, ad hoc/tenure or temporary basis to enable the father to look after the mother and child. This leave can be combined with leave of any other kind. g) The State Government is also directed that a female employee appointed on regular basis, contractual basis, ad hoc/tenure or temporary basis, with fewer than two surviving children, on valid adoption of a child below the age of one year be granted child adoption leave for a period of 135 days’ immediately after the date of valid adoption. h) The State Government shall not dismiss, terminate, remove any female employee whether appointed on contractual basis, ad hoc/tenure or temporary basis immediately before her delivery and thereafter to deprive her of maternity leave, adoption leave and child care leave etc. i) The Chief Secretary shall personally be responsible to comply with these mandatory directions in letter and spirit.” 7. Learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 & 3 submits that petitioner has not served for 240 days in the Institute and, in fact, her service fell short of 180 2025:UHC:3085-DB days also, therefore, she is not entitled to any benefit in terms of the judgment relied upon by the petitioner. 8. Learned counsel for petitioner, however, disputes this contention. He submits that the service rendered by the petitioner is more than 240 days. 9. Since a factual dispute is being raised by the parties, as to whether the service rendered by the petitioner is actually 180 days or 240 days, therefore, this Court cannot go into the said factual dispute. 10. We, accordingly, dispose of the Writ petition by directing the petitioner to make a representation to the Director, WIT, Dehradun claiming maternity leave. If petitioner makes such a representation, the concerned Director shall re-examine petitioner’s claim in the light of the judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 54 of 2015, without being influenced by the earlier order dated 24.08.2018 impugned in this Writ Petition. (Ashish Naithani, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 25.04.2025 Shiksha SHIKSHA BINJOLA Digitally signed by SHIKSHA BINJOLA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3410ef86ae41ec9fbabcd5dba6b3a2c2 4b5aa08b09c12f21822fbd40bf639b1c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=FD80A2D028949381C52796A542 D7FF0A9BED00E67B5283D205F18FE29BDF5DD 9, cn=SHIKSHA BINJOLA Date: 2025.04.28 10:26:14 +05'30'