Current Affairs Topics Archive
International Relations Economics Polity & Governance Environment & Ecology Science & Technology Internal Security Geography Social Issues Art & Culture Modern History

Woman entitled to maternity leave even if child isn't biological: SC

March 17, 2026 5 min read Polity & Governance Social Issues GS2
On This Page ▼

What Happened

  • In a landmark ruling delivered on March 17, 2026, a Supreme Court bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan struck down Section 60(4) of the Code on Social Security, 2020 as unconstitutional.
  • The struck-down provision restricted maternity leave for adoptive mothers to cases where the child adopted was below three months of age — effectively denying maternity benefits to most adoptive parents.
  • The Court held in Hamsaanandini Nanduri v. Union of India that this restriction violated Articles 14 (right to equality) and 21 (right to life and dignity) of the Constitution.
  • The judgment extends 12 weeks of maternity leave to adoptive mothers irrespective of the age of the child at adoption, and also covers mothers of children born via surrogacy.
  • The Court observed that motherhood cannot be reduced to biology alone — the bond formed between a mother and child outside the womb is equally intimate and crucial.
  • The bench further urged the Union government to consider introducing statutory paternity leave, observing that caregiving is a shared responsibility that the law must recognise.

Static Topic Bridges

Maternity Benefit Legislation: From 1961 Act to Social Security Code 2020

India's statutory maternity protection began with the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, which guaranteed paid leave for women in organised sector establishments. The Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017 significantly upgraded this framework: it extended paid maternity leave from 12 weeks to 26 weeks for women having fewer than two surviving children, introduced mandatory crèche facilities for establishments with 50 or more employees, and permitted work from home arrangements post-leave. The Code on Social Security, 2020 consolidated and replaced the 1961 Act and eight other labour codes, retaining the 26-week entitlement but also carrying forward the restrictive Section 60(4) limiting adoptive mothers to 12 weeks only if the child was below three months.

  • The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 originally covered factories, mines, plantations, shops, and establishments employing 10 or more workers; the 2020 Code extends coverage under the broader social security framework.
  • 26 weeks of paid maternity leave applies to the first two children; for a third child or more, leave is 12 weeks.
  • Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act 2017 received Presidential assent on 27 March 2017 and took effect from 1 April 2017.
  • Section 60(4) of the Social Security Code, 2020 — now struck down — had limited adoptive mothers' leave to 12 weeks and imposed the 3-month age cap.
  • India's 26-week paid maternity leave is among the longest in Asia, exceeding the ILO Convention No. 183 (Maternity Protection Convention, 2000) minimum of 14 weeks.

Connection to this news: The Court's ruling effectively creates parity between biological and non-biological mothers by nullifying the discriminatory age-of-child condition — requiring a legislative amendment to the Social Security Code to formally reflect this change in law.

Articles 14 and 21: Equality and Dignity in Labour Rights

Article 14 guarantees equality before law and equal protection of laws — it prohibits arbitrariness and requires that distinctions drawn by law must have a reasonable nexus to a legitimate state object. Article 21, as interpreted expansively since Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), encompasses the right to dignity, privacy, health, and livelihood within "life and personal liberty." Together, these provisions have been the constitutional bedrock for expanding labour protections and social security entitlements through judicial interpretation.

  • The Court's use of Article 14 targets the arbitrariness in distinguishing biological mothers from adoptive/surrogate mothers for the same welfare objective (bonding and care of a new child).
  • Article 21's right to dignity has been applied to maternity benefits before: in Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (2000), the Supreme Court held that female daily-wage workers were entitled to maternity benefits under Article 21.
  • K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) — the privacy judgment — recognised autonomy in reproductive decisions and family formation, providing additional grounding for non-biological parenthood rights.
  • Articles 42 (Directive Principle: just and humane conditions of work, maternity relief) and 39(e) (Directive Principle: protect health and strength of workers) impose a constitutional obligation on the State to ensure adequate maternity protections.

Connection to this news: The judgment exemplifies the Court's "reading up" doctrine — using Articles 14 and 21 to expand a statutory benefit beyond its textual scope when the restriction is found to be arbitrary and violative of human dignity.

Adoption, Surrogacy, and Expanding Definitions of Parenthood in Indian Law

India's legal framework on adoption is governed principally by the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (for Hindus) and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (secular adoption under CARA — Central Adoption Resource Authority). Surrogacy is now governed by the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, which restricts commercial surrogacy and permits only altruistic surrogacy by close relatives. The 2026 ruling is significant because it treats all categories of mothers — biological, adoptive, and surrogate — as equally deserving of maternity protection.

  • CARA (Central Adoption Resource Authority) is the nodal body under the Ministry of Women and Child Development that regulates domestic and inter-country adoptions in India.
  • The Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 restricts surrogacy to married Indian couples and prohibits commercial surrogacy; single women and same-sex couples are not covered.
  • The Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 (amended 2021) brought non-Hindu adoptions under a unified secular framework supervised by courts, replacing the earlier Guardian and Wards Act route for most prospective parents.
  • The ruling's urging for paternity leave aligns with global best practices: countries like Sweden, Norway, and Finland have statutory shared parental leave; India currently has no statutory paternity leave in the private sector.
  • Central government employees receive 15 days of paternity leave under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972; there is no equivalent statutory provision for private sector employees.

Connection to this news: The Court's call for paternity leave signals the judiciary's view that work-life balance and childcare are not exclusively maternal concerns — pointing towards a likely future legislative agenda for the Union government under Article 42's mandate.

Key Facts & Data

  • Case: Hamsaanandini Nanduri v. Union of India, decided March 17, 2026
  • Bench: Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan
  • Struck down: Section 60(4), Code on Social Security, 2020 (3-month age cap for adoptive mothers)
  • Constitutional violations found: Articles 14 and 21
  • Maternity leave entitlement post-ruling: 12 weeks for adoptive/surrogate mothers (regardless of child's age)
  • Maternity leave for biological mothers (first 2 children): 26 weeks (post-2017 amendment)
  • Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act 2017 effective from: 1 April 2017
  • Article 42 — Directive Principle: just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief
  • ILO Maternity Protection Convention No. 183 (2000): minimum 14 weeks paid leave
  • Central government paternity leave: 15 days (CCS Leave Rules, 1972)
  • Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (2000) — maternity benefits extended to daily-wage workers via Article 21