Punjab and Haryana High Court: The petitioner appeared before the High Court praying she was being denied child care leave on the ground that there are insufficient number of Medical Specialists available in the ESI Hospital at Jagadhari, with only one other Medical Specialist available other than the petitioner.
The Court noted down the fact that Rule 46 of the Haryana Civil Services (Leaves), 2016, stipulates in sub-rule 2 thereof that child care leave shall not be demanded as a matter of right and also, sub-rule 11 stipulates that child care leave would not be granted if it disrupts the functioning of offices/institutions/schools etc. The main reason to deny the leave was that there were no replacements available for the post of petitioner and to this, the Bench of Amol Rattan Singh, J. opined that the government cannot be allowed to take advantage of its own fault by denying a statutorily recognized right of anyone.
In the instant case, petitioners’ daughter was studying in Class 12 which the Court said is undoubtedly a very crucial year in the life of a school going child and therefore, the stand taken by respondents was termed wholly irrational and unacceptable. Finally, the Court allowed the petition and ordered the grant of child care leave within next 15 days and advised the respondents to engage a doctor on contract basis if required. [Dr. Kanchan Bala v. State of Haryana, CWP No. 21506 of 2017, decided on 10.10.2017]
