The Delhi High Court has ruled that pregnancy is not an illness or disability and cannot be used as grounds to deny government employment to women. The remark came as the Court reprimanded the Railway Protection Force (RPF) for denying a pregnant woman’s request to defer her Physical Efficiency Test (PET) for a constable position.
A bench of Justices Rekha Palli and Shalinder Kaur expressed their discontent with how the RPF and the Central government handled the woman’s situation. “It appears that the respondents [Union of India and RPF] have treated pregnancy as though it were a sickness or a disability on account of which women could be ousted from the selection process. In our view, motherhood should never and can never be the basis for denying public employment opportunities to women,” the Court stated.
The two-judge bench noted that the RPF could have postponed the PET for a few months, considering the petitioner had informed them of her pregnancy and her inability to perform tasks such as high jump, long jump, and running.
In response, the Court directed the RPF to conduct the woman’s tests and document verification within six weeks. If she meets the eligibility criteria, she is to be appointed to the position of constable with retrospective seniority and other consequential benefits. This order was issued five years after the woman filed her petition.
The Court emphasized that all authorities, particularly those handling public employment, must recognize the importance of supporting women eager to contribute to the nation. Pregnancy or similar conditions should not be used as reasons to deny employment opportunities. “In our considered view, discrimination based on pregnancy should never hinder a woman’s right to pursue her career aspirations. Maternity should not be seen as a barrier but as a fundamental human right of every woman. It is crucial for employers to create an inclusive environment where women can achieve their professional goals without facing unjust obstacles, especially those related to pregnancy,” the bench remarked.
It further criticized the authorities for being unaware of the rights and aspirations of young women, continuing to deny them employment opportunities based on pregnancy. “We, therefore, have no hesitation in holding that the decision of the respondents in rejecting the petitioner’s candidature is wholly unsustainable and is required to be quashed,” the Court concluded.
Additionally, the Court imposed costs of ₹1 lakh on the government, directing that the amount be paid to another woman who was injured when a portion of the ceiling in the High Court premises fell on her.
