Gujarat High Court
Funasia Network Llp vs Shrimati Nupur Mehra on 26 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4213 of 2024
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
FUNASIA NETWORK LLP
Versus
SHRIMATI NUPUR MEHRA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KIRAN C MEHTA(2718) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR ABHISHEK M MEHTA(3469) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
PARAM V SHAH(9473) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 26/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr.Param
Shah waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent
no.1.
2. The present petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India challenging the order passed by
learned Labour Commissioner in Appeal No.1 of 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
dated 27.07.2023 and the order passed by learned
labour officer dated 20.03.2023 directing the present
petitioner to pay maternity leave benefits to the tune of
Rs.3,24,000/- and Rs.1,000/- towards medical bonus.
2.1. It is the case of the present petitioner before this
Court that respondent no.1 was working with the firm
namely Funasia Awesong which is a proprietorship firm
and she was serving as a Radio Jockey. Due to
pregnancy, she applied for maternity leave from
October, 2022 onwards for the period of six months and
thereafter, notice was issued seeking compensation
under the provision of Maternity Benefits Act claiming
salary of six months at the rate of Rs.54,000 per month.
Thereafter, complaint came to be filed before the
learned Labour Welfare Officer, Ahmedabad and as
petitioner, though after receiving notice, could not
attend the proceedings which was initiated before the
Labour Welfare Officer as he was out of India and
thereafter, order was passed by the competent authority
directing present petitioner to pay maternity benefits to
the present respondent, which was challenged before
the appellate authority by filing appeal being Appeal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
No.1 of 2023 which was also dismissed and the same is
the subject matter of challenge before this Court in the
present petition.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr.K.C.Mehta and learned
advocate Mr.Param Shah for the respondent.
3.1. Learned advocate Mr.K.C.Mehta submits that both
the authorities had committed error in directing the
present petitioner who is Funasia Networks LLP to pay
amount of benefit towards maternity leave to the present
respondent. Learned advocate Mr.K.C.Mehta submits
that the appointment was made under the Funasia
Awesong which is the proprietorship concern having
directorship of one Dhrumil Pratik Mehta however,
proceedings were initiated against Funasia Network
L.L.P. who is limited liability partnership firm and where
the Directors are one Pratik Shantilal Mehta. Learned
advocate Mr.K.C.Mehta submits that though both the
entities belong to the same family, however, they were
registered under different registration certificate and
their business is also distinct to each other. Learned
advocate Mr.K.C.Mehta submits that in addition to that,
the petitioner was in Dubai at the relevant point of time
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
when the notices were issued by the authority and
subsequently, he could not attend the hearing before the
learned Authority and therefore, ex-parte order was
passed against the present petitioner which was
confirmed by the appellate authority and in that
background the petitioner is required to be given one
fair opportunity to adduce the evidence before the
learned competent officer and thereafter, directions are
required to be issued to decide afresh. Learned advocate
Mr.K.C.Mehta submits that without considering the
material, the learned appellate authority has dismissed
the appeal therefore, impugned orders require to be set
aside and application be decided afresh by the learned
Labour Welfare Officer.
3.2. Per Contra learned advocate Mr.Param Shah submits
that as per the information received from the Ministry of
Corporate Affairs, Funasia Network L.L.P. was under the
directorship of Mr.Pratik Shantilal Mehta and Dhrumil
Pratik Mehta and their e-mail ID stated in the official
website is [email protected]. Learned
advocate Mr.Param Shah submits that on the said e-mail
address various correspondence had taken place by
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
respondent seeking maternity leave which were
responded by one Ronak Shah who was the Manager of
Perfect Tax and Finance stating that as per the company
policy, respondent would be entitled for one month
maternity leave that also on condition that on resuming
the duty she has to serve atleast for one year in the
petitioner company. Learned advocate Mr.Param Shah
submits that the official address stated in the website of
Funasia Network LLP is of 7th floor, 704, Merlin
Pentagon, Mahalaxmi Five Road, Paldi, Ahmedabad and
as per the I-card issued by the Funasia Network LLP, the
respondent was serving with Funasia Network LLP.
Learned advocate Mr.Param Shah further submits that
as per the show details, the official website address is
mentioned as funasia.net. Learned advocate Mr.Param
Shah submits that only to deprive the respondent from
maternity leave, which is a statutory right conferred
under the Constitution of India, the fake defence were
raised first time before the appellate authority that both
the entities are different. Learned advocate Mr.Param
Shah submits that with regard to this second ground of
not having strength of 10 employees which is required
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
under the Maternity Benefits Act is concerned, as per
the observations made by the learned appellate
authority, on visit of the Inspector, a report was
prepared wherein, it is stated that petitioner company is
having strength of 10 employees and name of each
employee along with their designations are mentioned in
the report which is submitted before the learned
appellate authority. Learned advocate Mr.Param Shah
submits that though order was passed by the learned
appellate authority rejecting the appeal filed by the
present petitioner on 27.07.2023 and though stay was
not granted by this Court, till date no benefits were
given to the present respondent. Learned advocate
Mr.Param Shah further submits that after assigning
cogent reasons learned labour Court passed impugned
award and therefore, no interference is required and
petition is required to be dismissed.
4. Having considered the arguments advanced by the
learned advocates for their respective parties and the
reasons assigned by the learned authority i.e Labour
Welfare Officer as well as competent authority under the
Maternity Benefits Act, 1961 it emerges that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
respondent was serving as a Radio Jockey and she was
given appointment by Funasia Awesong Network and it
emerges from the appointment order that she was paid
monthly salary of Rs.54,000/-. The communication which
is part of the reply was sent to Mr.Goldie Thakore on his
e-mail [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], cc to [email protected],
[email protected] informing on 05.08.2022 that the
respondent has conceived pregnancy of 21 weeks and
therefore, she wishes to avail maternity (paid) leave for
the period of six months. The said e-mail was replied by
one CA Mr.Ronak Shah stating the designation as
Manager of Perfect Tax and Finance on 09.08.2022
informing that as per the company policy the respondent
can avail paid maternity leave for one month provided
that she serves at least for one year after resuming duty.
It is also informed that if she cannot serve for one year
after resuming duty, maternity benefit would be
withdrawn. It is also informed in the said e-mail to the
respondent that if there are any querries, it can be
discussed with Vaishalben. Thereafter, again
correspondence has taken place of respondent and said
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
Pratik Mehta, Ronak Shah, Vaishali on 10.08.2022
informing that government has a policy for every
working woman in India to get maternity leave of six
months (26 weeks) leaves therefore, she had again
requested to sanction maternity leave. Thereafter,
number of correspondences were part of the reply from
which it emerges that time and again the respondent has
informed to sanction the leave but the same remained
unattended. At the last, on 06.10.2022 it was informed
by one Swati Gupta of Perfect Tax and Finance Service
that after leave deduction and working hours calculation
of the respondent, the leave balance is -28 as on
31.09.2022 and therefore, -28 leave is going to be
adjusted in the pay-roll cycle of that month itself. As
maternity leave benefits were not given to the present
respondent, therefore, the notices were issued to
Funasia Network L.L.P, Pratik Mehta, Dhrumil Mehta,
Vaishali Thakkar, Saumil Thakkar on 22.10.2022
informing that the benefit of maternity leave to be paid
immediately and the salary which is deducted be also
refunded otherwise, appropriate legal steps would be
taken.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
4.1. Admittedly as said notice remained unreplied.
Therefore, the application was filed under the Maternity
Benefits Act being application no.350 of 2023 wherein,
though notice is issued on 20.03.2023 to the present
petitioner however, the petitioner did not participate in
the proceedings before the learned Deputy Labour
Commissioner and therefore, after relying on the reports
submitted by the Inspector under the Maternity Benefit
Act, the Medical Certificate issued by the registered
medical practitioners, the bank statements suggesting
that prior to the delivery she worked continuously for
more than 80 days and the communication which was
addressed to the petitioner, the learned authority has
passed order on 20.03.2023 directing the present
petitioner to pay amount of Rs.3,24,000/- + Rs.1,000/-
towards medical bonus. The said order was upheld by
the learned appellate authority. The only contention
raised by the petitioner is that she was not his employee
an she was employee of Funasia Awesong Network
however on referring the identity card, the detail taken
from the website of Ministry of Corporate Affairs, details
of the shows which are part of the record at page 47, it
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
emerges that appointment was given under Funasia
Awesong where the proprietor name is mentioned as
Dhrumil Pratik Mehta who is the same proprietor/
director stated in the website details of Funasia Network
LLP. Additionally, though communications/ emails were
sent to Funasia Network LLP however, same was replied
by the authorized person in the manner that respondent
would entitle for one month maternity benefit. If the
case of the petition was that the respondent was not
employee of the petitioner then the reply could have
been given in that line.
4.2. With regard to non attending proceedings before the
learned Deputy Labour Commissioner is concerned, the
only contention raised was they were out of country and
therefore, though petitioner received notice but did not
attend the hearing. However, to substantiate that
submission no documentary evidence was placed on
record and in that background the impugned order
cannot be set aside as the petitioners were negligent
careless and irresponsible in attending the proceedings
before the learned authority. Another argument raised
that strength of the employee is less than 10 therefore,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
benefit of maternity act cannot be given to the
respondent is concerned, the Inspector has visited the
company and has prepared a report which was
submitted along with the details of each employee with
their designation stating that the strength of employee is
10 and therefore, would have applicability of the Act to
the petitioner.
5. This Court refers to the decision rendered by the Apex
Court in the case of Deepika Singh Vs Central
Administrative Tribunal and Ors reported in (2023)
13 SCC 681 wherein, the Apex Court has held that the
grant of maternity leave under 1972 Rule is intended to
facilitate the continuance of women in the workplace. It
is a harsh reality that but for such provisions, many
women would be compelled by social circumstances to
give up work on the birth of a child, if they are not
granted leave and other facilitative measures. No
employer can perceive child birth as detracting from the
purpose of employment. Child birth has to be construed
in the context of employment as a natural incident of life
and hence, the provisions for maternity leave must be
construed in that perspective.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
6. This Court also refers the decision rendered by the Apex
Court in the case of K.Umadevi Vs Government of
Tamil Nadu reported in 2025(0) AIJEL-SC 75408
wherein it is held that 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
acknowledged facets of Article 21.Article 42 of the
Constitution of India which is one of the directive
principles of State policy mandates that the State shall
make provisions for securing just and humane conditions
of work and for maternity relief. Deprivation of access to
reproductive healthcare or emotional and physical well-
being also injures the dignity of women. It is to ensure
that a working lady may overcome the state of
motherhood honourably, peaceably and undeterred by
the fear of being victimized for forced absence from
work during pre and post natal periods. Women must be
treated with honour and dignity at places where they
work to earn their livelihood. It is not just motherhood
but also childhood that require special attention and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
therefore, both health of mother and child are to be kept
in consideration while providing maternity leave.
Concept of maternity leave is a matter of not just fair
play and social justice but is also a constitutional
guarantee to the women employees of this country
towards fulfillment whereof the State is bound to act.
6.1. As the maternity benefit act is enacted to secure the
women's right to maternity leave and to afford women
with as much flexibility as possible to live an
autonomous life, both as a mother and as a worker. By
depriving the said benefit the petitioner has violated the
constitutional right. By ignoring the purpose of the act
while putting the condition to have the maternity leave
for one month with condition to work for one year after
resuming the duty the respondent was put in a situation
where her emotional and physical well being injures.
7. In view of above, this Court is of the opinion that this
petition is required to be dismissed with exemplary cost
of Rs.50,000. The cost be deposited with the Registry of
this Court within a period of two weeks from the date of
this order.
8. The same shall be disbursed in the favour of respondent
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4213/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
no.1 after due verification.
9. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed. Rule is
discharged.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
ARCHANA S. PILLAI
