The Rajasthan High Court has clarified that Child Care Leave (CCL) is akin to Privilege Leave and cannot be claimed as an absolute right. The court emphasized that the grant of such leave is subject to administrative discretion and is not mandated to be granted for the maximum period of 120 days.
Background
The case involved Suman Bishnoi, an Assistant Professor at Maharani Sudarshan College for Women in Bikaner, who had applied for 53 days of Child Care Leave. She sought the leave to care for her 2-year-old son and to assist her 14-year-old son during his Class 10 Board Examinations. However, the state authorities granted her only 15 days of leave, prompting her to file a petition challenging the decision.
Read Also:- Punjab and Haryana High Court Expresses Shock Over 13-Minute Power Outage in Hospital
Bishnoi argued that under Rule 103C(2)(xi) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, Child Care Leave could be sanctioned for a maximum period of 120 days. She relied on a memorandum dated September 10, 2018, which clarified that CCL should be treated like Privilege Leave and could be granted for up to 120 days at a time.
The bench of Justice Arun Monga referred to Rule 91 and Rule 59 of the Rajasthan Service Rules. Rule 91 outlines the admissibility of Privilege Leave, stating that a maximum of 120 days can be granted at a time, except in specific medical cases. Rule 59, on the other hand, clarifies that leave cannot be claimed as a right and that the authority has the discretion to refuse or revoke leave based on public service exigencies.
“Child care leave is since akin to Privilege Leave, similar parameters will thus apply. Be it Privilege or Child Care Leave, as the case may be, it cannot be claimed as a matter of unfettered right. Discretion is reserved with the authority empowered to grant leave to refuse or revoke leave at any time according to the exigencies of the public service.”
The court further noted that the administrative authority has the discretion to grant Child Care Leave up to 120 days if the circumstances warrant it, but there is no obligation to grant the maximum period.
Read Also:- Madras High Court: Trial Courts Cannot Deny Video Conferencing Facility to Lawyers and Litigants
Justice Monga highlighted that the 15 days of leave granted to Bishnoi likely covered the duration of her elder son’s final examinations. The court found no illegality in the state’s decision and refrained from interfering with the administrative authority’s discretion.
“This court would refrain to substitute its own discretion over that of the administrative authority, unless it is a case of malafide exercise of power, which is not the case herein,” the court stated.
Consequently, the petition was dismissed, and all pending applications were disposed of.