The Delhi High Court has delivered a landmark judgment holding that employees of unaided, privately managed but recognized schools in Delhi are entitled to child care leave (CCL) on par with government school employees. This ruling is a significant victory for teachers and school staff in the private education sector.
Background of the Case
The judgment came in an intra-court appeal filed by a teacher at an unaided private school, who challenged the dismissal of her writ petition. She had sought CCL from 1 May to 30 September 2025, citing academic pressure on her Class XII son. This ground is covered under Rule 43(C) of the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972, which permits CCL for taking care of the two eldest surviving children, whether for rearing or for looking after any of their needs, such as education, sickness, and the like.
Court's Observations
The Division Bench, led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, anchored its ruling on two provisions of the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973. Section 10 of the DSE Act mandates that prescribed benefits of the employees of a recognized private school shall not be less than those of the employees of the corresponding status in schools run by the appropriate authority.
Rule 111 of the 1973 Rules states that every employee of a recognized private school, whether aided or not, shall be entitled to such leave as are admissible to employees of a corresponding status in government schools. The court held that Rule 111 makes no distinction between leave with a monetary character (like earned leave, which can be encashed) and leave without one (like CCL or maternity leave). Since CCL is available to government school teachers, private school employees cannot be denied it.
Overruling Previous Judgment
A lower court had earlier rejected the teacher's plea, citing two older judgments. The more important of the two was a 2014 ruling that had interpreted the law to mean that private school employees were only entitled to benefits that could be converted into money, like a bonus or leave encashment. However, the 2014 case was about a librarian who wanted to retire at 60 instead of 58, and had nothing to do with child care leave. The High Court said it was wrong to stretch that ruling and apply it to a leave entitlement case.
The bench noted, "CCLs are special types of leaves which are prescribed for the benefit of the child. They serve a larger societal goal and public interest in furthering every individual's right to a wholesome family life, securing the interest and health of infants — all of which are answered by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The discretion for granting CCL should be exercised liberally by the employers, keeping its objective and underlying purposes in mind." This observation drew on an earlier Delhi High Court ruling.
Final Verdict
The Division Bench allowed the appeal, set aside the Single Judge's order of 8 August 2025, and directed the school to "consider the prayer for grant of CCL made by the appellant afresh and decide the same with expedition." Private schools in Delhi may now need to revisit their leave policies to ensure employees are not denied CCL benefits available to their counterparts in government schools.
