Latest Madras High court News | Top Madras High court News Headlines Today | Today India news | Breaking Madras High court News Today | English Madras High court News Headlines - TheDailyGuardian

Madras High Court Upholds LGBTQIA+ Rights: Affirms ‘Chosen Families’ Beyond Same-Sex Marriage

June 5, 2025, 12:49 pm

The Madras High Court has strongly backed the rights of LGBTQIA+ individuals to form “chosen families”. The court stated that marriage is not the only way to find family and belonging. In a recent ruling on May 22, a division bench of Justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan made this clear while granting liberty to a 25-year-old lesbian woman who had been forcibly separated from her partner by her family.

What Did The Court Say On This Matter?

“Marriage is not the sole mode to find a family. The concept of a ‘chosen family’ is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence,” the court stated.

The court observed that the woman’s mother was unwilling to accept her daughter’s sexuality. “Not every parent is like Justice Leila Seth. She could acknowledge and accept her son’s sexual orientation,” the judges noted. “The mother of the detainee is no Leila Seth. We endeavoured in vain to impress upon her that her daughter, being an adult, is entitled to choose a life of her own.”
The judges also expressed concern over the use of the term “queer” to label non-heterosexual individuals. “We feel a certain discomfort in employing the expression ‘queer’. Any standard dictionary defines this word as meaning strange or odd. Queering one’s pitch means spoiling the show,” they said. The bench argued that there is nothing strange about homosexuality, and such individuals should not be described in alienating terms.

Additional Steps Taken By The Court

The court criticised the police for their role in the case, stating, “We censure the rank inaction on the part of police and the insensitivity shown by them.” The officers reportedly forced the woman to return to her parents despite her clear wishes.
The court ensured that the woman and her partner receive protection from police and are not disturbed by her family. The ruling is a big step forward in strengthening legal recognition of LGBTQIA+ relationships beyond marriage.

Wife Watching Porn, Masturbating Not Valid Reason for Divorce: Madras High Court

March 20, 2025, 1:32 pm

Emphasizing that women preserve their sexual independence even after marriage, the Madras High Court has decided a wife&ampamp;’s act of watching pornography and masturbating does not provide cause for divorce.

After a man from Tamil Nadu questioned a lower court&’s ruling denying his request for divorce, the judgement was issued. He contended that his wife was cruel in referring to her supposed dependency on self-pleasure while viewing adult materials.

The high court nevertheless rejected his appeal, saying that “self-pleasure is not forbidden fruit.”

Masturbation is Natural for Both Genders, Says Court

The court remarked in its judgment, according to AFP, that if men’s masturbation is accepted to be typical, women’s masturbation cannot be stigmatized.

The court went on to say that marriage does not delete a woman’s individuality; she maintains her uniqueness even after marriage and her essential identity as a woman is not consumed by her spousal status.

Addiction to Pornography Not a Legal Ground for Divorce

Though the court recognized that a pornography habit is “wrong” and can’t be “morally justifiable,” it found it doesn’t exceed the legal level for divorce.

Divorce Remains a Taboo in India

In India, deeply ingrained social and family expectations help to keep divorce relatively uncommon. One of the lowest divorce rates worldwide is seen in statistics showing that only one in hundred marriages ends in divorce.

Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court Demands Response On Agni Theertham Pollution

November 21, 2024, 5:58 am

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Wednesday instructed officials to submit a counter affidavit within two weeks in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) addressing pollution concerns at Agni Theertham in Rameswaram.

The PIL raises alarm over sewage and contaminated water mixing with the sacred sea, posing threats to environmental health, devotees, and marine life.

Advocate Elephant Rajendran filed the petition, highlighting the pollution near the Rameswaram Ramanathaswamy Temple. The petition alleged that sewage from the Rameswaram municipality was contaminating the sea, particularly in the vicinity of Agni Theertham, a revered holy water body. It also noted that the roads leading to the site were in poor condition, exacerbating the plight of devotees.

Must Read: Massive Cleanup Drive In Badrinath Clears 1.5 Tonnes Of Waste

Rajendran stated that despite repeated complaints to the authorities, no action had been taken to address these pressing issues. He urged the court to direct the authorities to immediately halt sewage discharge into the sea and improve road conditions for visiting devotees.

A Division Bench comprising Justices M. S. Ramesh and A. D. Maria Clete issued the directive while hearing the petition. The petitioner sought specific action from the Ramanathapuram District Collector to prevent sewage from polluting the sea and to ensure the roads and *padithurai* (bathing areas) were properly maintained.

The court adjourned the matter for further hearing on November 27.

Also Read: Pollution Hits Every Family In Delhi-NCR: Alarming Health Survey

Police Raid Sadhguru’s Isha Foundation Amid Habeus Corpus Allegations

October 1, 2024, 10:28 pm

On October 1, 2024, a large-scale police raid was conducted at Sadhguru‘s Isha Foundation ashram in Thondamuthur, Coimbatore, following a Madras High Court directive. The raid, involving 150 officers, was triggered by a habeas corpus petition filed by Dr. S. Kamaraj, a retired professor, who claimed that his two daughters, Geetha and Latha Kamaraj, were being held against their will at the foundation.

The court raised serious concerns after hearing allegations that the Isha Foundation was “brainwashing” young women, encouraging them to renounce material life and cutting off their communication with family members. The petition also brought up a criminal case involving a doctor at the foundation accused of molesting 12 girls under the POCSO Act, intensifying the court’s scrutiny.

During the raid, police and other officials interviewed residents and inspected the premises to ensure the well-being of the ashram’s residents. The foundation, however, denied all allegations, maintaining that individuals at the ashram were there voluntarily, pursuing spiritual paths of their own choosing. The foundation also pointed out that both daughters had appeared in court earlier and confirmed they were staying there willingly.

Also read: Sri Lanka Welcomes Indians with Visa-Free Travel From Today

The raid is part of a broader investigation, with the Madras High Court asking for a detailed report on all criminal cases linked to the foundation. As of now, the foundation remains under scrutiny, and more details from the ongoing investigation are expected to emerge in the coming days.

Madras High Court Questions Sadhguru’s Encouragement of Women Choosing Hermit Life

October 1, 2024, 10:38 am

The Madras High Court has raised concerns over spiritual leader Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev’s encouragement of young women to shave their heads and adopt a monastic lifestyle. The court questioned why Sadhguru, who arranged his own daughter’s marriage, promotes renunciation for others’ daughters.

Father Alleges Daughters “Brainwashed” by Isha Foundation

This came after retired professor S. Kamaraj, who previously taught at Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, claimed that his two educated daughters had been “brainwashed” into staying at the Isha Yoga Centre. He filed a petition asking for his daughters, aged 42 and 39, to appear in court.

Daughters Testify Their Stay is Voluntary

Both women appeared in court and confirmed they were staying at the Isha Foundation by choice, not under duress. They had given similar statements in earlier hearings over the decade-old case, following their parents’ claims that their daughters’ decision to live at the center had caused their lives to become miserable.

Court to Investigate Further

Despite their testimonies, the court decided to investigate deeper and instructed the police to collect information on all cases linked to the Isha Foundation. Justice V. Sivagnanam questioned, “Why is a man who got his own daughter married and settled encouraging others’ daughters to live as hermits?”

Isha Foundation’s Defense

The Isha Foundation responded, emphasizing that the women’s decision to stay was voluntary. “We believe that adults have the right to choose their own paths. We do not enforce marriage or monkhood; these are personal decisions,” the foundation said. They added that the center accommodates both those pursuing normal lifestyles and those embracing Brahmacharya (monkhood).

The foundation also clarified that only one police case was active, with another case having been stayed by the court.

Acting Chief Justices Appointed for Madhya Pradesh, Madras HC

May 22, 2024, 6:47 pm

The Ministry of Law and Justice, representing the Central Government, officially announced the appointment of Acting Chief Justices for the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the Madras High Court.

According to the notification issued for Madras High Court, “In exercise of the power conferred by Article 223 of the Constitution of India, the President is pleased to appoint Justice R. Mahadevan, Judge of the Madras High Court, to perform the duties of the office of the Chief Justice of that High Court with effect from May 24, 2024, consequent upon the retirement of Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala, Chief Justice, Madras High Court on May 23, 2024.”

The Madhya Pradesh HC announced that, under the authority granted by Article 223 of the Constitution of India, the President has appointed Justice Sheel Nagu, a Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, to act as the Chief Justice of that High Court starting from May 25, 2024. This appointment follows the retirement of Justice Ravi Vijay Kumar Malimath, who served as the Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court until May 24, 2024.

Justice R Mahadevan, born on June 10, 1963, in Chennai, completed his law degree at Madras Law College in 1989. With 25 years of experience, he specialized in indirect taxes, customs, and Central Excise matters, practicing in civil, criminal, and writ sides. He served in various capacities, including as Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) for Tamil Nadu, Additional Central Government Standing Counsel, and Senior Panel Counsel for the Government of India at Madras High Court, handling over 9000 cases. He was appointed as a judge of the Madras High Court in 2013.

Justice Sheel Nagu, appointed as a Madhya Pradesh High Court Judge in May 2011, has served there since. With a background in Constitutional, service, labor, and criminal law, he has contributed significantly with over 499 reported judgments during his 12-year tenure. On December 27, 2023, the Supreme Court collegium recently recommended him as the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, citing his fitness and suitability for the role.

Madras High Court Rejects Bail Plea of Former TN Minister V Senthil Balaji in Money Laundering Case

February 28, 2024, 4:05 pm

The Madras High Court rejected the bail plea of former Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji in a money laundering case filed by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) on Wednesday. Balaji, who has been in jail for eight months, had his bail petition dismissed by Justice N Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court. The Principal Sessions Court has been instructed to conclude the hearing within three months, but Balaji’s request was denied due to “no change in the circumstances.”

Balaji was arrested by the ED on June 14 last year and has been in judicial custody since then. Earlier attempts to secure bail, including a plea in the Madras High Court on October 19, 2023, and petitions in a local court on September 20 last year and the Chennai Sessions court on January 12 this year, were unsuccessful.

The former minister was arrested in connection with a money laundering case related to an alleged cash-for-jobs scam during his tenure as the TN Transport Minister in the previous AIADMK government. The case stems from allegations dating back to his time as transport minister in Jayalalithaa’s Cabinet from 2011 to 2015.

Three FIRs were filed against Balaji by local police in 2018, leading to the registration of an Enforcement Case Information Register (ECIR) by the ED. Despite joining the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) in December 2018 and assuming office as the electricity minister after the party’s victory in May 2021, Balaji’s legal troubles continue.

Money laundering case: Chennai court extends Senthil Balaji’s judicial custody till Jan 22

January 11, 2024, 2:54 pm

Tamil Nadu Minister Senthil Balaji’s judicial custody was extended by the Principal District and Sessions Court of Chennai in relation to a money laundering case involving cash for jobs. Balaji has been placed under remand until January 22. On June 14 of last year, he was taken into custody by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in accordance with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). A plea to remove Balaji from the State Cabinet because of his involvement in the money laundering case was denied by the Supreme Court earlier on January 5.

The appeal was filed by ML Ravi against the Madras High Court, which left it to the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu to take a call on Balaji’s continuation in the Tamil Nadu Cabinet as a Minister without portfolio.
The former Minister for Electricity as well as Prohibition and Excise, Balaji was arrested on June 14 in connection with a money laundering case linked to an alleged cash-for-jobs scam when he was the Transport Minister during an earlier AIADMK regime. The ED had arrested Balaji in connection with an Enforcement Case Information Register (ECIR) filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act in 2021.
The ECIR was registered on the basis of three FIRs lodged against him by the local police in 2018 for his alleged involvement in a cash-for-job case when he was the Transport Minister in Jayalalithaa’s Cabinet in 2015. The charges date back to his tenure as transport minister during the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) government from 2011 to 2015.
He joined the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) in December 2018 and assumed office as the Electricity Minister after the party came to power in May 2021.

Workers in the Tamil Nadu Transport Union call off their protest in order to speak with the Labour Commissioner

January 10, 2024, 4:32 pm

The Tamil Nadu Transport Union, which had been staging daily protests to press for the signing of the 15th wage revision agreement in order to raise wages and fill positions for bus drivers and conductors, decided to end their stand on Wednesday. The Centre of Indian Trade Union (CITU), Anna Thozhir Sangam Peravai, and other labor unions stated in the Madras High Court that their members must report for duty in the public interest and call off their strike until January 19, when the Labour Commissioner will hold conciliation talks.

“The High Court has given an order to temporarily withdraw the strike by the Trade Union. After the meeting on 19, we will take a decision. For the past two days, there was no problem because of the strike,” Tamil Nadu Transport Minister S S Sivashankar said to ANI after the Transport Union announced withdrawal of the strike in the Madras High Court.
Chief Justice Sanjay V Gangapurwala and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy of the Madras High Court earlier on Wednesday expressed concern over the bus strike and asked the state government and the Labourers Union to sort out the issue keeping the public interest in mind.
The Madras High Court Chief Justice’s bench on Wednesday heard a PIL plea which was filed by a student from Chennai in which it was suggested to declare the ongoing bus strike illegal.
The Transport Union’s demands also included releasing the dearness allowance (DA) of Rs 6,000 per month for retired workers, which has been on hold for the last eight years.
Earlier in the day, CITU State president A Soundararajan claimed that the state government is “playing politics.”

Madras HC Pronounces 3-Year Jail Term for TN Minister K Ponmudi

December 21, 2023, 12:38 pm

The Madras High Court handed down a three-year simple imprisonment sentence to Tamil Nadu Education Minister K. Ponmudi in a Disproportionate Assets (DA) case. Justice G Jayachandran, presiding over the case, also levied a fine of Rs 50 lakh each on the minister and his wife. Notably, the judge suspended Ponmudi’s sentence for 30 days, considering his current role as the Higher Education Minister.

On Tuesday, the Madras High Court overturned a trial court ruling that cleared Ponmudi of charges in the DA case. Based on an appeal filed by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC), Justice G. Jayachandran overturned the trial court’s decision to acquit Minister Ponmudi. Ponmudi and his wife were ordered to appear in court on December 21.

The DA case dates back to the period when the DMK was in power from 2006 to 2011, and Ponmudi and his wife, Visalakshi, faced prosecution during the AIADMK regime in 2011 for allegedly accumulating assets beyond their income. The investigation, led by Villupuram District Anti-Corruption Superintendent of Police Kanniyappan, involved more than a hundred individuals, with chargesheets filed against the accused.

Initially tried in the Villupuram Chief Criminal Court, the case was later shifted to the Villupuram Anti-Corruption Special Court in 2015. Following a transition in power, the case was transferred to the Vellore District Principal Sessions Court in November 2022.

In a surprising turn, Ponmudi and his wife appeared in court on the day of judgment in the asset embezzlement case. The presiding judge, citing insufficient evidence, ruled in favor of the accused on June 28. With no appeal from the anti-bribery department against the judgment, Madras High Court Judge Anand Venkatesh took up the case suo motu.

Ponmudi sought resolution in the DA matter by filing an appeal in the Supreme Court, but the plea was dismissed by the apex court. The recent ruling by the Madras High Court has placed the Tamil Nadu Education Minister in a challenging legal position, and the upcoming days will likely witness further legal developments in this high-profile case.

Udhayanidhi Stalin says he stands by comments on Sanatana, despite the High Court cautions

November 6, 2023, 2:38 pm

Minister for Tamil Nadu Udhayanidhi Stalin, who has drawn criticism for his divisive “Sanatana Dharma” statement, declared that he would not retract it and that it is consistent with the positions taken by Periyar and BR Ambedkar.

“I stood strong with my statement on Sanatana Dharma. I won’t back down from my statement. I will face it legally. I didn’t speak more than what Ambedkar and Periyar have spoken,” Udhayanidhi Stalin said at a press conference speaking on the Madras High Court Judge Justice G Jayachandran’s observation on the case.
Udhayanidhi said that party positions or positions in the government do not matter much to him and it is important to be “human” first.
“Today the position of the Minister, MLA and Youth Wing Secretary will be there and tomorrow it may not be there. More than everything, we have to be humans first,” he said.
The Tamil Nadu Minister who is also the son of Chief Minister MK Stalin said that they have been speaking on the Sanatana issue for centuries.

We have been discussing the Sanatana issue for centuries, and it is a lengthy one. We will oppose it at any time,” Udhayanidhi declared. The Tamil Nadu Minister’s statementsfollowing Judge G Jayachandran of the Madras High Court’s admonition to those in positions of authority not to make such statements “This Court believes that those in positions of authority should be aware of the risk that their words may ignite fissiparous tendencies, act responsibly, and refrain from spreading ideas that will drive people apart on the basis of ideology, caste, or religion,” the judge said.

Madras High Court rejects the bail plea of Tamil Nadu minister Senthil Balaji in cash-for-job scam

October 19, 2023, 12:36 pm

On Thursday, the Madras High Court rejected the bail application of Tamil Nadu Minister V Senthil Balaji, who is being held in custody due to a money laundering case involving cash-for-jobs that was filed by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED). The Madras High Court on Monday reserved its decisions regarding the bail plea for today after hearing the arguments from both ED and Senthil Balaji. Balaji claimed in his petition that his health was such that he needed ongoing physical therapy. Additionally, his attorneys argued that he had chronic lacunar stroke symptoms that had been verified by a doctor.

However, the ED opposed the bail by saying that he is not suffering from a health condition that can not be treated in the prison hospital, adding that a health condition that requires immediate medical attention can be the reason for granting bail.
ED also argued in the court that if he gets bail there is a high chance that he may tamper with evidence and influence witnesses.
ED arrested Balaji on June 14. According to ED, the Cash-for-Jobs scam happened when he was the Transport Minister during the previous AIADMK regime.

Balaji was taken to a government hospital in Chennai after complaining of chest pain following his arrest on June 14. He was then transferred from the Tamil Nadu government’s Multi Super Speciality Hospital to Kauvery Hospital in Alwarpet after the Madras High Court approved his transfer to a private hospital of his choosing on June 15. His medical professionals had suggested a bypass operation. Balaji was transferred to prison as soon as he was released from the hospital because his second remand period was valid until July 19.

SC rejects transfer of Madras HC judge, approves request of two others

March 31, 2023, 2:11 pm

The Supreme Court Collegium recently rejected a request made by Justice VM Velumani to retain her as a Madras High Court judge or in any North-Eastern states. The Collegium, headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, rejected the request of Justice Velumani and refused to reconsider the original decision.

The Collegium, in its resolution dated 29 September, 2022, had proposed to transfer Justice Velumani to the Calcutta High Court for the better administration of justice. Justice Velumani, who was appointed as a judge of the Madras High Court on 20 December, 2013, sought reconsideration of the recommendation in a letter dated 14 October, 2022. Her request was not granted by the Collegium, which reiterated its recommendation for her transfer.

Justice Velumani, in a communication dated 17 March, 2023, sought a transfer to a High Court of the North-Eastern States, preferably Manipur or Tripura, on the ground that she would then be able to retain her official accommodation in Chennai.

“The request made by Justice VM Velumani to retain her at the Madras High Court has been rejected by the Collegium on an earlier occasion. There is no valid reason to reconsider the earlier decision of the Collegium by which her transfer has been recommended to the Calcutta High Court or to grant her fresh request. Her request for transfer to either Manipur or Tripura or any High Court in the North-Eastern States is rejected,” stated the resolution passed by the Collegium.

In another resolution, the Collegium, also comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, KM Joseph, MR Shah, and Ajay Rastogi, accepted the request of Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma for the transfer to the Punjab and Haryana High Court from the Patna High Court, where he is currently posted.

Justice Sharma has sought repatriation to the Rajasthan High Court on the ground of his poor health and the unavailability of adequate medical facilities in Patna. “He has informally requested that if his repatriation to the Rajasthan High Court is not possible, he would seek a transfer to the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in view of the nature of the medical facilities available at Chandigarh to facilitate treatment of his condition,” the resolution stated.

It added that the Collegium resolved that it is not possible to repatriate Justice Sharma to his parent court. “Bearing in mind the health reasons that have led the judge to seek a transfer out of the High Court where he is posted at present, the Collegium resolves that Justice Sharma be transferred to the High Court of Punjab and Haryana,” the Collegium said.

MADRAS HIGH COURT PAVING THE WAY FOR WOMEN EMPLOYEES

February 4, 2023, 1:31 pm

Women have always struggled t o m a n a g e motherhood with employment and our society has made it worse for them. Although with evolving times, women are now a dominantly integral part of every working setup yet, their struggle to fight for their struggle to fight for their rights has still not come to an end. Recently on January 12, 2023, a Writ Appeal was filed before a two-judge bench of the Madras High Court (‘Court’) challenging the order passed by the Learned Single Judge, wherein, a direction was issued to Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Coimbatore (‘TNSTC or Appellant’) to treat B. Rajeswari’s (‘Writ Petitioner’) maternity leave period of six months as duty period for all purposes. The Writ Petitioner was sponsored through Employment Exchange to the post of an Assistant Engineer against the existing vacancy and after going through several levels of selection, she was hired for the position of an Assistant Engineer in TNSTC, Coimbatore on September 09, 2013 on temporary basis and had joined service on September 16, 2013.

The Writ Petitioner submitted that from the date of her joining to October 29, 2013, she was on a regular probation period and after successful completion of her training period, she reported as an Assistant Engineer from October 30, 2013. After which, she continued her training till March 18, 2014. Subsequently, the Writ Petitioner forwarded an application seeking maternity leave from March 19, 2014 to July 19, 2014 and from July 20, 2014 to September 14, 2014 (totaling 180 days). Post delivering a baby, she completed her balance training period from September 14, 2014 to March 13, 2015 and during the said period, she was paid a consolidated amount of INR 7500 only, Thereafter, she was posted at the corporate office of TNSTC from October 10, 2015. It was submitted by the Writ Petitioner that vide a notification by the Tamil Nadu State Government, the maternity leave admissible to a married woman government official was enhanced to 90 days with an option of spread over from the preconfinement rest to postconfinement recuperation. Subsequent thereto, there was another notification by the State Government of Tamil Nadu, wherein, the maternity leave was further enhanced from 90 days 180 days.

The Writ Petitioner further stated that even though she had requested for grant of statutory leave with full pay and benefits from March 19, 2014 to September 14, 2014 (totaling 180 days), she was granted leave only on loss pay for the said time period. In addition to this, the Writ Petitioner submitted that she made several requests to the Appellants to treat her maternity leave of 180 days with salary and also refix her seniority on and from October 10, 2014 instead of April 01, 2015 but, it did not yield any positive results to her. Thus, the Writ Petitioner filed a Writ Petition on the following grounds:

1.In light of Maternity Benefits Act, 1961 (‘Act’), no woman shall be deprived of her maternity benefits.

2.That according to the Tamil Nadu Maternity Benefit Rules, 1967 (‘Rules’) and in consonance with Section 28 of the Act , there was no discrimination in respect of women based on their status or nature of their employment.

3.That Article 42 of the Constitution of India has laid down the provisions with respect to maternity relief in an egalitarian manner and Article 39(d) Part IV lays down the disparity between men and women. Lastly, Article 51A(g) again speaks about the disparity and derogatory treatment of women in the territory of India.

The Learned Single Judge accepted the plea of the Writ Petitioner and directed that the maternity leave sought by the Writ Petitioner for the aforesaid period should be considered as duty period for all purposes and asked TNSTC to pass an order accordingly within 4 weeks. The Court also ordered TNSTC to extend all the services and monetary benefits for the said period of maternity leave in their order. Being aggrieved by the said order of the Court, TNSTC filed a Writ Appeal stating that the Writ Petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Engineer on September 16, 2013 only on temporary basis and thus, she is not entitled to claim any maternity benefits. As per the Rules, a woman employee, with regular scale of pay can only claim the maternity benefits on production of a medical certificate if she has completed on year of service in the organization. TNSTC further stated that as per a notification of the Transport (CI) Department dated May 21, 1999, there is no provision for grant of eligible maternity leave during the training period.

An employee who is not permanent and have actually worked in the organization for a period of not less that 160 days in 12 months would be eligible to seek maternity benefits mentioned therein. The Counsel for the Appellant contended that since the Writ Petitioner has worked only for 145 days, she is not eligible to get the maternity relief as laid down under the Rules. The Counsel for the Appellant vehemently submitted that it is true that the Act is a welfare legislation but, it does not mean that the benefits arising therefrom must be extended to a person who does not array in the classifications provided thereunder. In light of this, the Counsel for the Appellant further submitted that since the Writ Petitioner is not a permanent employee of the Appellant, it fails to comply with the provisions and thus, is not entitled to claim full wages and refixation of her seniority. Further, to support his argument, the Counsel for the Appellant referred to a catena of judgments.

To the contrary, the Counsel for the Writ Petitioner contended that the denial of the maternity relief as granted by the statute to the Writ Petitioner by the Appellant is not appreciated and contrary to the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Maternity benefit is an ease bestowed upon female employees and they need to be granted all the benefits so as to facilitate the female taking care of the newborn child. The Counsel for the Writ Petitioner also relied upon various judgments to support his argument. Further, the Counsel for the Writ Petitioner contended that since the Act guarantees certain maternity benefits to a female employee during pregnancy, it is incumbent upon the employers to comply with the statutory provisions and grant her all the benefits mentioned therein. He further submitted that depriving a woman employee of her statutory rights with respect to maternity relief merely on a discriminatory treatment between temporary and permanent employment is an atrocious act. Hence, he prayed before the Court that the order of the Learned Single Judge does not warrant any interference by this Court. The Court opined that the interpretation of the Rule given by the Appellant is narrow and hence, cannot be accepted.

If the employee completed 160 days even in a period of less than 12 months, which would mean that it is not essential that the employee would be working in the organization for actual 12 months and completed 160 days in those 12 months. The Court relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Workmen of American Express International Banking Corporation v. Management of American Express International Banking Corporation , wherein, it was held that the employee should have completed the required number of days within the time stipulated and the Writ Petitioner herein had completed the same. The Court said that “the birth of a baby is a rebirth of a mother and if a woman is not properly taken care of during pregnancy and postdelivery, it will certainly have an effect on two lives”.

It was further stated by the Court that both Central and State governments have been liberally formulating various schemes for the welfare of women and the authorities concerned shall cooperate too in the implementation of the same. In addition to this, the Court further referred the ‘modus operandi’ adopted by other countries with regard to the grant of maternity benefits to their citizens. The Court also quoted Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam that “the future of our country is in the hands of children” and he wanted to make children grow in a hale and healthy manner and make education reachable and flexible to all the children in this country. If they are not protected in the womb in a healthy atmosphere by way of proper care to the mother, the dream of our former President will only be a mirage.

The Court observed that the Writ Petitioner had admittedly rendered sufficient days of service and even assuming that there is a shortage of working days in the 12 calendar months, welfare legislation and the benefits thereunder cannot be deprived on mere interpretation and technicalities as interpretation of law should be liberal to ensure marching towards enforcement and it should not defeat the very purpose of the welfare scheme. The Court said “a woman is not a pendulum and cannot be forced to swing between motherhood and employment as the maternity benefit relates to the dignity of a woman. In Hindu mythology, women who respect elders and sacrifice their life for the welfare of their husband’s family are portrayed as equal or even greater than men and are regarded as equivalent to God.

The act of the Appellant in depriving the maternity leave and other benefits to the Writ Petitioner is ‘ex facie’ bad in law”. In view thereof, the Court dismissed the Writ Petition and directed the Appellant to comply with the order within 4 months failing which, a fine of Rs. 50,000 would be imposed on them. This judgment of the Madras High Court has paved the way for women in India. Over the years, women have found it difficult to manage motherhood with employment but with this positive step taken by the Court, women will now be able to manage the two phases with ease. It is a commendable step and deserves appreciation

Madras High Court Asks State: ‘Why Don’t You Close Retail TASMAC Outlets By 9:30 PM Instead Of 10 PM?’

January 24, 2023, 1:44 pm

The Madras High Court in the case N Mohan and another v. Additional Chief Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Department and another observed and has asked the state government if it was feasible to close the retail liquor vending shops associated with TASMAC by 9:30 pm and to keep the bars running till 10 pm so that the last minute consumers do not end up consuming alcohol on the streets.

The bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice T Raja and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing pleas filed by two shopkeepers, for framing guidelines, rules, and regulations with regard to the place for consuming alcohol by purchasers after closing time of TASMAC shops and the bars being attached thereto. It has been argued by the petitioners that to allow the shops and the bars to function till 10 pm had led to a situation where the last-minute purchasers consume alcohol in the streets causing a nuisance to women, children, and neighbours. Therefore, apart from nuisance to the public and pollution to the environment, the petitioner submitted that the situation may also result in an increase in the number of crimes against women and children.

It has further been submitted by the State government its counter and informed the court that the Government was considering extending the functioning time of bars attached to the TASMAC retail vending shops beyond 10 pm. At the Outset, the said court asked the state to consider closing the retail outlets by 9:30 and closing the bars by 10 pm or 10:30 pm so that the consumers can remain in the bars and consume alcohol. It has also been directed by the court that Advocate General R Shunmughasundaram to get instructions on the same and adjourned the matter by a week.

However, the State also challenged the maintainability of the petitions and submitted that decisions with respect to the opening and closing of TASMAC liquor retail vending shops and the attached bars were purely being a policy decision of the Government and the individuals had no locus standi to interfere with the policy decisions of the Government.

Senior Counsel K Sukumaran appeared for the petitioners and Advocate General R Shunmugasundaram represented the respondent.

Madras High Court: Plea Challenging Provisions of Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act

December 21, 2022, 1:19 pm

The Madras High Court in the case S Shanmugalatha and others v Union of India and others observed where a group of women has approached challenging the constitutional validity of Section 27(2) of the Assisted Reproductive Technology (the Regulation) Act, 2022. It has also been stated in the petition that while reading down of Section 21(b) of the Act so as to allow oocyte donors for making at least 6 oocyte donations in their lifetime as per the guidelines issued by the Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR) Guidelines.

The bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice T Raja and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy observed and has directed the petitioners in the plea to submit additional documents in the nature of scientific evidence to support their claims.

The bench observed that as provided under section 27 of the the Assisted Reproductive Technology Act prescribes rules which are to be followed by the assisted reproductive technology banks for sourcing gametes while Section 21 is taking about the general duties of assisted reproductive technology banks and clinics.

It has been contended by the petitioner that the provisions of the ART Act restrict the number of times that oocytes which can be donated, wherein resulting in huge wastage of oocytes and an astronomical increase in costs and for waiting time. Further, it has been submitted that the provisions were being brought in before the court without any application of mind. Thus, the petitioner contended that there would be an increase in treatment costs and a shortage of donors if the donor are being allowed to donate only once.

It has also been submitted by the petitioner that specifying age restrictions for donors is per se illegal and in violation of Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India and also the woman’s right is affected to make reproductive choices which also comes within the dimension of personal liberty.

The petitioner stated the object of the legislature being to streamline the process of Assisted Reproduction, wherein stating the mandatory provision of gamete collection by ART Bank which makes the entire process more expensive and complicated for obtaining of the donor gametes and is not in consonance with the purpose and object of the Act.

Accordingly, the court adjourned the matter.

SUPREME COURT: NOTICE ISSUED ON MOTHER’S PLEA CHALLENGING BAIL GRANTED TO ACCUSED; KALLAKURICHI STUDENT SUICIDE

December 16, 2022, 7:41 pm

The Supreme Court in the case A. P. Selvi vs State Represented by Inspector of Police and Ors has observed and issued a notice on a plea challenging the order of the Madras High Court which granted bail to 5 accused persons in the suicide case of Kallakuruchi student.

The bench comprising of Justice B. R. Gavai and Justice Vikram Nath observed and has sought response on the petition filed by the mother of the victim.

However, it has been contended by the petitioner in the plea that the impugned judgment is against the basic principles of bail jurisprudence. The petitioner also stated that the High Court “erred in giving of the findings on the merits of the case which comes in the way of fair trial and dispensation of justice.”

It is stated by the petitioner in the plea that the High Court had passed the judgment in the manner as if it was seized of the appellate proceedings which is pertaining to the acquittal of the accused. Further, the petition pointed out that, the High Court also went on observing that the offence of 305 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 is not at all attracted against the respondents or accused person in Paragraph 16 of the impugned judgment which clearly passed the judgment in the nature of acquittal than merely giving a bail order.

In the plea the petitioner submitted that the accused are influential people and can affect the investigation and cam also pose a threat to the family of the petitioner.

Further, the petitioner contended that one of the accused has criminal antecedent which the court has not considered and an application filed by another accused, wherein bail was granted on an oral prayer which is being made and is unjust and arbitrary exercise of power.

Therefore, the petitioner prayed to allow his petition and to set aside the impugned order passed by the High Court of Madras.

In the present case, the alleged suicide of the Class 12th student had led to a public outcry and widespread protest in Tamil Nadu.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner are Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra assisted by AOR Rahul Shyam Bhandari and Advocate G Priyadarshini.

Dhoni files criminal contempt plea against IPS Officer Sampat Kumar

November 5, 2022, 12:45 pm

Former Indian Cricketer Mahendra Singh Dhoni has filed a criminal contempt of court plea against IPS officer Sampat Kumar in Madras High Court for his alleged remarks against the Supreme Court in context of the Indian Premiere League betting case.

The former cricketer has also sought a compensation of Rs 100 crore from the officer and Zee Media Corporation for making match fixing allegation against him. Kumar had investigated the 2013 IPL spot-fixing and betting cases. However, in 2014 the court had restricted the officer from passing any derogatory remarks against the cricketer.

Dhoni alleged that on 17 December 2021, Officer Sampat Kumar filed an affidavit stating inflammatory remarks against the Madras High Court and the top court. Dhoni, in his affidavit, said that he had filed a defamation suit in 2014 against Kumar. “The statements of the third respondent are scandalous and are capable of shaking the faith of the common man in the justice system. I submit that the statements of the Respondent/3rd Defendant made by him in his additional written statement lowers the authority of the Court and also has the effect of interfering and obstructing the administration of justice,” the plea added.

Kumar had also claimed that the sole purpose of the cricketer for filing case in the Madras High Court is to ‘gag’ him.

While highlighting the statements of Officer Kumar’s pleading, Dhoni said, “He has stated that the Supreme Court deviated its focus on the rule of law and shelved the deposition of the Justice Mudgal Committee and kept it in sealed cover for reasons he failed to comprehend.”

Madras High Court orders for a repostmartum in Kallakurichi Violence

July 18, 2022, 6:13 pm

The Madras High court on Monday passed an order for a repostmortem of the schoolgirl who was found dead in a private school on July 13.

Justice N Sarishkumari instructed the Tamil Nadu government to formulate a special team to investigate the case and also identify and arrest those involved in the violence of July 17 who plundered the school.

The order is passed on the petition by the girl’s father. The repostpartum will be conducted by a team of doctors nominated by the court, and the entire process is advised to be filmed in the presence of the girl’s father along with a lawyer.

The parents of the girl were retrained from talking to the media about the incident, and they were directed to take the crops of the girl after the autopsy is done.

The judge of the Madras High Court expressed dismay over the mob’s decision to burn the certificates of the students and said, “Police were not under the control of anyone. They should enforce the law. This court will monitor the probe.”

He said that the violence appears to be an organised crime and that strict action must be taken against those involved.