Supreme Court ने Section 60(4) of Social Security Code को असंवैधानिक घोषित किया, सभी दत्तक माताओं को 12‑सप्ताह की मातृत्व अवकाश का विस्तार किया

<h2>Overview</h2> <p>The <span class="key-term" data-definition="Supreme Court of India — the apex judicial body in India, whose judgments interpret the Constitution and have binding effect (GS2: Polity)">Supreme Court</span> on 17 March 2026 struck down <span class="key-term" data-definition="Section 60(4) of the Social Security Code, 2020 — a provision that limited maternity benefit to adoptive mothers only when the child was less than three months old (GS2: Polity)">Section 60(4)</span> of the <span class="key-term" data-definition="Social Security Code, 2020 — a comprehensive labour law that consolidates various social security statutes, including maternity benefits (GS3: Economy)">Social Security Code, 2020</span>. The Court held that the age‑based restriction violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and directed that any woman who legally adopts a child, irrespective of the child’s age, is entitled to a 12‑week maternity leave from the date of hand‑over.</p> <h3>Key Developments</h3> <ul> <li>Bench of <strong>Justice Pardiwala</strong> and <strong>Justice R. Mahadevan</strong> read down the provision to: “A woman who legally adopts a child, or a commissioning mother, shall be entitled to maternity benefit for a period of 12 weeks from the date the child is handed over.”</li> <li>The Court declared the age limit “illusory and devoid of practical application,” citing lack of rational nexus with the objective of the Code.</li> <li>Judgment invoked Articles 14 (equality before law) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) as the constitutional basis for striking down the provision.</li> <li>The Court urged the Union to legislate a separate <span class="key-term" data-definition="Paternal leave — a statutory leave granted to fathers for child‑care, currently not covered under the Social Security Code (GS2: Polity)">paternal leave</span> as a social security benefit.</li> </ul> <h3>Important Facts</h3> <p><strong>Case No.</strong> W.P.(C) No. 960/2021; <strong>Petitioner</strong> Hamsaanandini Nanduri v. Union of India.</p> <p>The petition originally challenged the 2017 amendment to the <span class="key-term" data-definition="Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 — legislation that provides paid maternity leave and related benefits to women workers (GS3: Economy)">Maternity Benefit Act</span>, which also limited benefits to children below three months. After the 2020 Code repealed the Act, the focus shifted to the corresponding clause in the Code.</p> <p>The petitioner highlighted procedural delays under the <span class="key-term" data-definition="Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) — statutory body that regulates and facilitates adoption in India (GS2: Polity)">CARA</span> and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which can extend the time before a child is legally free for adoption to four months.</p> <h3>UPSC Relevance</h3> <p>The judgment illustrates the application of constitutional principles (Articles