A private TV channel recruited some female journalists to anchor their various programs, live shows and reality shows. The terms and conditions of the employment was that such female employees shall remain unmarried, mai

CS Professional · Labour Laws & Practice · PYQS · December 2022
A private TV channel recruited some female journalists to anchor their various programs, live shows and reality shows. The terms and conditions of the employment was that such female employees shall remain unmarried, maintain glamours look, slim and fit, till the age of retirement, which was kept as 35 years. However, at the discretion of the management, the employee's services could be terminated before the age of 35 years, if she could not maintain her look or gets married. Purvi, one such employee, after two years of taking up the employment in that TV Channel, got married, but she kept this news, as secret and not informed her employer. After some time, when she got pregnant, the matter was revealed to the management. As a result, and as per the terms of the employment, she was expelled from the services. In light of the above facts, comment, whether putting up of such stringent conditions of employment on the part of the employer was right? Give your answer with any decided case law.

Answer & Explanation:

Article 14 of the Constitution of India reads as under: 'The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.' Article 14 bars discrimination and prohibits discriminatory laws. The said Article is clear in two parts – while it commands the State not to deny to any person 'equality before law', it also commands the State not to deny the 'equal protection of the laws'. Equality before law prohibits discrimination. It is a negative concept. The concept of 'equal protection of the laws' requires the State to give special treatment to persons in different situations in order to establish equality amongst all. It is positive in character. Therefore, the necessary corollary to this would be that equals would be treated equally, whilst un-equals would have to be treated unequally. In the case of the Air India v. Nargesh Meerza (1981 AIR 1829) , Regulation 46 and 47 of Air India Employees Service Regulations was in question which provides that an air hostess will retire from the service upon attaining the age of 35 years or on marriage within 4 years of Service or on first pregnancy, whichever occurs earlier but the Managing Director had the discretion that he may extend the age of retirement one year at a time beyond the age of retirement up to the age of 45 years at his option if an air hostess was found medically fit. It was held by the court that the clauses regarding retirement and pregnancy of the regulation as unconstitutional and therefore struck down. The retirement of air hostess on the ground of pregnancy was unreasonable and arbitrary and it was in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Applying this principle, the stringent conditions of employment imposed by the private TV channel, such as remaining unmarried, maintaining a certain look, and termination upon marriage or pregnancy, are discriminatory and violate the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution. Such conditions are unreasonable and arbitrary, infringing upon the fundamental rights of female employees.

Topics: Constitutional Law; Labour Law Principles

Open in Interactive Practice Hub · Full Practice Hub · Chapter Weightage · More in this subject

Related Questions in this Topic