The Kerala High Court on Friday quashed a job notification that states only male candidates to apply observed that a female who is completely qualified can’t be denied of her entitlement to be considered for work.
The court set aside a ban contained in a job notice gave by Kerala Minerals and Metals Limited which permitted only male candidates to apply for the post.
The court said that the ban is violative of the provisions of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution.
The court commented on the embargo that “ It is the bounden obligation of the respondents who are Government and Government functionaries to find all suitable ways to see that a lady can complete the obligations allotted to her at the entire hours, securely and conveniently,” Justice Anu Sivaraman observed.
“In the event that that be along these lines, there would be no justification denying an appointment to a qualified hand just on the ground that she is a lady and on the grounds that the idea of the business would expect her to work during night hours.”
Treasa Josfine, an engineering graduate in Safety and Fire Engineering was engaged by Kerala Minerals and Metals Limited, a public area undertaking under the State of Kerala, as a graduate engineer trainee.
She tested a warning welcoming applications for the permanent post of Safety Officer accessible in the organization to the degree it expressed that solitary male applicants need to apply for the post, on the ground that it is prejudicial and that her privilege for being considered for appointment as Safety Officer is disregarded because of the said provision.
“I make it clear that such protective provisions cannot stand in the way of a woman being considered for employment for which she is otherwise eligible”
Josfine also prayed for proclaiming section 66(1)(b) of the Factories Act, 1948 is illegal as violative of Article 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution. The said provisions specify no lady will be required or permitted to work in any factory except between the hours of 6 A.M. and 7 P.M.
The court, in its judgment refers to various earlier judgments in which it was held that the provisions of Section 66(1)(b) are beneficial in nature and are intended to protect women from exploitation.
The court said that we have to consider the time of the Factories Act,1948. The act was enacted at a time when women working in the late hours were extremely exploitative and violative.
The court also said “ we cannot neglect the contributions of women in the present scenario.”
The court observed that however Section 66(1)(b) is just a protective provision, it very well may be worked and practised distinctly as security and can’t be an excuse for denying commitment to a lady who doesn’t need such protection anymore, LiveLaw reported.