In a case highlighting procedural lapses in granting Child Care Leave (CCL), the Bombay High Court at Goa noted that a government authority failed to follow mandatory policy requirements while rejecting leave. However, since the purpose of the leave no longer survived, the court disposed of the petition.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by Valencio D’Souza, challenging orders of the Goa Human Rights Commission which had rejected his complaint and subsequent review.
The dispute arose after his wife, an Assistant Accounts Officer at the Institute of Psychiatry and Human Behaviour, sought 266 days of Child Care Leave to support their son during his Class 12 studies amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Read also:- Supreme Court Flags Delays in Legal Aid Appeals, Issues Binding Timelines to Speed Up Justice for Prisoners
As noted on page 2 of the judgment, only 60 days of leave were granted, and her request for extension was later refused.
Aggrieved, the petitioner approached the Human Rights Commission, alleging that the refusal violated the rights of his child. The Commission, however, found no violation and dismissed the complaint.
Justice Dr. Neela Gokhale examined the applicable government circulars governing Child Care Leave. The court noted that these rules require authorities to seek approval from the competent Minister before rejecting such leave applications.
Referring to the policy documents reproduced in the judgment (pages 6–7), the court observed that rejection without such approval would amount to non-compliance with the prescribed procedure.
“The officer concerned failed to adhere to the CCL policy relevant at that point in time,” the court recorded, pointing to a clear procedural lapse.
The court also acknowledged the importance of Child Care Leave, emphasizing that it supports working women in fulfilling parental responsibilities and ensures that motherhood does not become a disadvantage in employment.
Read also:- Supreme Court Rejects Plea for FIR Against Wife in Dowry Case, Upholds Legal Protection Under Law
“The legislation seeks to ensure that motherhood… is accommodated as a socially valuable function warranting protection,” the bench observed.
The High Court found that the concerned authority did not follow the mandatory process before rejecting the leave request.
As highlighted on page 9, the court stated that the Director should have forwarded the proposal, along with a recommendation, to the concerned Minister for a final decision instead of rejecting it outright.
This lapse, the court said, deprived the petitioner’s child of the mother’s support during a crucial academic period.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Refuses to Quash Cheque Bounce Case, Says Withdrawal Slip Can Qualify as Cheque
Despite noting the lapse, the court held that the matter had become infructuous. The child had already completed the relevant academic phase, and the purpose of seeking leave no longer existed.
“As the purpose for which the CCL was sought no longer exists, nothing survives in the petition,” the court stated.
The Bombay High Court at Goa disposed of the petition, while emphasizing that government officials must adhere strictly to Child Care Leave policies to ensure their intended objectives are met.
Case Details
Case Title: Valencio D’Souza v. Director, Institute of Psychiatry & Human Behaviour
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 764 of 2023
Judge: Justice Dr. Neela Gokhale
Decision Date: 16 April 2026
