In between the yelling on the TV news channels and pop-up ads on our devices, news that matters often gets overlooked. On May 23, the Supreme Court of India passed a major judgement allowing maternity benefits to a Tamil Nadu-based teacher for her third child.

Her plea was earlier rejected by the High Court, but the top court set aside the ruling under the Fundamental Rule 101 (a). The Supreme Court has ruled that there is no cap on the number of times a woman can avail maternity leave benefits under the Maternity Benefits Act.

Credit: ANI

In her petition, the woman said her maternity leave was denied on grounds that she had two children from her first marriage. Tamil Nadu has a rule that maternity benefits will only be extended to the first two children, however, the woman claimed that she did not avail the benefits at that time. She joined government services only after her second marriage.

The court ruled in favour of the women, saying that maternity benefits will be seen as part of basic reproductive rights.

A Bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan observed, “In the context of employment, child birth has to be construed as a natural incident of life and, hence, provisions for maternity leave must be construed in that perspective. Observing that when courts are confronted with such situations, they would do well to attempt to give effect to the purpose of the law in question rather than to prevent its application.”

Credit: Pexels

It concluded that the rejection of maternity leave based on the number of biological children, without considering custody and current family circumstances, violates the right to dignity and reproductive choice. The court held that while there is no cap on the number of children, the period of benefit is reduced for those having two or more children.

It said, “There is no ceiling or cap on the number of children to claim maternity benefit... Only thing is that in case of a woman employee having two or more than two surviving children seeking maternity leave, period of the benefit is reduced.”

Credit: Pexels

Emphasising on Article 21 of the Constitution, the top court bench said, “By judicial interpretation, it has been held that life under Article 21 means life in its fullest sense; all that which makes life more meaningful, worth living like a human being. Right to life includes all the finer graces of human civilization, thus rendering this fundamental right a repository of various human rights. Right to life also includes the right to health. Right to live with human dignity and the right to privacy are now acknowledged facets of Article 21.”

Credit: Pexels

The judgement goes a long way in protecting women and their rights because maternity benefits are not just about office perks but they’re integral to gender equality. In the absence of these rights, most women are forced to leave their jobs and suffer a huge financial setback. No, in 2025, women should not have to choose between motherhood and career. Society owes support to women in a phase that is so critical to her own life as well as the nation’s future.