ASHA MEHTA Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The seven petitioners herein, who were initially working on ad hoc basis and claim to have been regularised, were granted maternity leave for the periods mentioned in paragraph 2 of the writ petition. They are aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not paying them the salary for the period during which they availed of maternity leave.

(2.) No written statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents. The facts stated by the petitioners having not been controverted, are therefore, assumed to be correct.

(3.) Mr. Umesh Wadhwa, learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment delivered by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 4684 of 1986. In almost similar circumstances their Lordships of the Division Bench following the judgment of the Supreme Court in Rattan Lal Vs. State of Haryana, 1985(2) SLJ 437 observed as under:-