• Case Name: Shikha Yadav and Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh and 2 Others
  • Court: Allahabad High Court
  • Bench: Justice Siddharth Nandan
  • Judgment Date: 28 July 2026

Case Overview

The Allahabad High Court ruled that a woman government employee cannot be denied maternity leave for her second child merely because two years have not passed since her earlier maternity leave. The Court held that the provisions of the Code on Social Security, 2020 override any conflicting executive instructions contained in the U.P. Financial Handbook. It emphasized that maternity benefits are welfare measures meant to protect the health and dignity of working women and should not be restricted through administrative rules. The judgment strengthens the legal protection available to women employees and reaffirms that statutory rights cannot be curtailed by executive instructions.

Also Read– LegalRath Daily Legal Brief | Top Legal Developments of 7 August 2026

Facts

The petitioners were government employees in Uttar Pradesh who applied for maternity leave for the birth of their second child. Their applications were rejected by the authorities on the ground that Rule 153 of the U.P. Financial Handbook permits a second spell of maternity leave only if at least two years have passed since the end of the first maternity leave.

The petitioners challenged the rejection before the Allahabad High Court. They argued that the restriction imposed by the Financial Handbook was inconsistent with the Code on Social Security, 2020, which governs maternity benefits and contains no such requirement of maintaining a two-year gap. They further submitted that a statutory law enacted by Parliament must prevail over executive instructions issued by the State Government.

Court’s Observations

The High Court observed that maternity leave is a beneficial and welfare-oriented right intended to safeguard the health of both the mother and the child. Such a right should receive a liberal interpretation rather than a restrictive one.

The Court noted that Section 161 of the Code on Social Security, 2020 gives overriding effect to the provisions of the Code whenever there is any inconsistency with other laws or rules. Since the Code does not prescribe a mandatory two-year interval between two maternity leaves, the restriction contained in the U.P. Financial Handbook cannot prevail.

The Bench held that executive instructions issued through the Financial Handbook are subordinate to parliamentary legislation. Therefore, they cannot reduce or restrict statutory maternity benefits granted under the Code.

The Court also referred to earlier decisions of the Allahabad High Court, including cases decided under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, where similar restrictions had been held invalid because the central legislation prevailed over conflicting state rules. The Court observed that the same legal principle continues to apply under the Code on Social Security, 2020.

According to the Court, denying maternity leave solely because two years had not elapsed would defeat the object of the law, which is to ensure maternal health, child welfare, and the dignity of women in employment. Welfare legislation should be interpreted in a manner that advances its purpose rather than defeats it.

Decision

The Allahabad High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order refusing maternity leave.

The Court directed the competent authority to reconsider the petitioners’ claims in accordance with the provisions of the Code on Social Security, 2020, without relying upon the two-year restriction contained in the U.P. Financial Handbook. It made it clear that maternity leave for a second child cannot be denied merely because there is less than a two-year gap from the previous maternity leave.

Conclusion

This judgment is an important step towards protecting the rights of working women. It reiterates that maternity benefits are statutory and welfare-oriented rights that cannot be restricted through executive instructions. By giving precedence to the Code on Social Security, 2020 over the U.P. Financial Handbook, the Allahabad High Court reinforced the principle that parliamentary legislation prevails over conflicting administrative rules.

The decision also reflects a progressive approach towards women’s employment by ensuring that technical conditions do not deprive eligible employees of maternity benefits. It is likely to guide future cases involving maternity leave and strengthen legal safeguards for women employees across government departments in Uttar Pradesh.