Kerala High Court Strikes Down Gender Discrimination In Job Notification

Judgement Given On : 09/04/2021

Background of the Case

In the judgment delivered on April 9, 2021, the Kerala High Court, in the case of Treasa Josfine v. State of Kerala & Ors., handed down a landmark ruling that struck a significant blow against gender-based discrimination in job notifications. This ruling underscored the critical importance of gender equality and challenged deeply ingrained notions that certain roles were unsuitable for women due to night shifts or other factors.

The case revolved around a job notification released by Kerala Minerals and Metals Limited (hereafter referred to as Respondent No. 2) for the permanent position of Safety Officer. What made this notification particularly contentious was the provision stating that only male candidates were eligible to apply for the role.

Treasa Josfine, an engineering graduate with expertise in safety and fire engineering, had previously been hired by Respondent No. 2 as a Graduate Engineer Trainee (Safety). She took it upon herself to challenge the discriminatory job notification, contending that it not only infringed upon her right to be considered for the position of Safety Officer but also violated her constitutionally guaranteed rights under Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Indian Constitution. Additionally, she sought the court’s declaration that Section 66(1)(b) of the Factories Act, 1948, which restricted the working hours of women, was unconstitutional on similar grounds.

Respondent’s Argument

In defense of their stance, Respondent No. 2 argued that the position of Safety Officer was subject to the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948. Specifically, they pointed to Section 66(1)(b) of this act, which stipulated that women employees should not be required or permitted to work except between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. Respondent No. 2 contended that Safety Officers were expected to work round the clock, including during night hours when necessary, to fulfill their responsibilities effectively.

Key Findings and Detailed Analysis of the Kerala High Court’s Judgment

The judgment handed down by the Kerala High Court encompassed several pivotal findings, each with far-reaching implications:

  1. Evolution of Women’s Roles: The court, in its wisdom, acknowledged the tremendous evolution of women’s roles in both society and the workforce. It noted that when the Factories Act, 1948, was originally enacted, its primary objective was to shield women from exploitation by restricting their work hours, particularly during nighttime. However, the court astutely recognized that societal norms and employment dynamics had evolved significantly since then. It highlighted the fact that women were now actively engaged in various professions, including those demanding continuous work, such as healthcare, aviation, and information technology.
  2. Equality and Non-Discrimination: One of the foundational principles emphasized by the court was the concept of equality and the prohibition of discrimination as enshrined in the Indian Constitution. The court made it abundantly clear that a woman who is fully qualified and capable should never be denied employment on the sole basis of her gender, especially when the nature of the job entails working during nighttime or unconventional hours.
  3. Rejection of Gender Stereotypes: The judgment prominently cited the decision of the Supreme Court in Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya and others. This case had determined that an absolute bar preventing women from seeking specific appointments amounted to a clear violation of the constitutional guarantee of equality under Article 14. In a resounding rejection of gender stereotypes, the Kerala High Court asserted that such stereotypes perpetuate gender discrimination and encroach upon the fundamental rights of women.
  4. Section 66(1)(b) of the Factories Act: The court recognized that while Section 66(1)(b) was indeed a protective provision, it should exclusively serve as a safeguard rather than an excuse to deny employment to a woman who no longer requires such protection. In other words, this provision should be applied judiciously to protect women workers, when necessary, without being employed as a blanket restriction against qualified women in roles that may involve nighttime work.

Conclusion

The Kerala High Court’s judgment in the Treasa Josfine case stands as a significant milestone in the ongoing struggle for gender equality and the eradication of gender-based discrimination in the sphere of employment. This precedent challenges deeply entrenched stereotypes and reaffirms the fundamental principle that women, when fully qualified, should never be deprived of opportunities simply because of their gender or the characteristics of the job, including night shifts. By striking down the discriminatory job notification and raising questions about the constitutionality of Section 66(1)(b) of the Factories Act, 1948, the court sends a resolute message that gender-based barriers to employment have no place in modern society. This judgment contributes substantially to the ongoing efforts to create a workforce that is not only equitable but also inclusive, where individuals are assessed based on their qualifications and abilities rather than their gender. It signifies a step towards realizing a more just and equal society for all.