Gujarat High Court Intervenes in Teacher's Maternity Leave Termination Case
The Gujarat High Court has issued a stay order against state education authorities. They cannot recover Rs 1.14 lakh in salary paid to an assistant teacher. The teacher, Babybahen Sharma, allegedly lost her job because she could not attend document verification in person due to her pregnancy.
Case Background: Appointment and Termination
Babybahen Sharma received an appointment as an assistant teacher at K L Patel Kanya Vidyalay in Unjha town, Mehsana district. After her selection, Sharma faced a challenge. She was pregnant and unable to travel for physical document verification.
The district education officer granted her permission for online verification. This process took place on March 26, 2025. Once she could travel, authorities granted her a personal hearing before finalizing her appointment. She joined her duties and later proceeded on maternity leave for 112 days. Her scheduled return to work was January 13.
Sudden Termination During Leave
However, on December 4, 2025, while still on maternity leave, the education department terminated Sharma's services. The stated reason was that her documents had not undergone physical verification. Just six days later, the department issued another letter. This letter demanded the recovery of the salary already paid to her.
Feeling aggrieved, Sharma approached the Gujarat High Court. She challenged both her termination and the recovery order.
Legal Arguments in Court
Sharma's counsel presented key evidence before the court. They showed the district education officer's order that approved the online document verification. The counsel argued that the department had already found all her documents to be genuine during the online process.
The legal team contended that the termination ground lacked legal sustainability. They stated, "the ground on which the services of the petitioner came to be terminated cannot be said to be legally sustainable and therefore, this court's interference is required."
High Court's Interim Orders
After a preliminary hearing, Justice Nirzar Desai took decisive action. The court stayed the salary recovery order immediately. It also directed the concerned authorities to file a reply. They must justify their actions by January 30.
The High Court issued further directions to facilitate a fair resolution:
- The court permitted Sharma to approach the Mehsana district education officer. She can now submit the original documents that she could not present earlier due to her pregnancy.
- It directed the authorities, including the school and its trust, to provide a specific opinion on the genuineness of Sharma's documents.
- Critically, the court ordered that the vacant assistant teacher post created by Sharma's removal shall not be filled until further hearings.
This case highlights significant issues regarding employment rights during maternity. The court's intervention questions administrative actions that may disproportionately affect women during pregnancy and leave periods. The next hearing will scrutinize the authorities' justification for their decisions.
