The Allahabad High Court has ruled that pregnancy cannot be used as a reason to deny a woman public employment, observing that forcing a woman to choose between motherhood and a job violates her constitutional rights.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh made the observation while allowing an appeal filed by Komal Jaiswal, who challenged the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Services Selection Commission (UPSSSC)'s refusal to postpone her Physical Efficiency Test (PET) for the Forest Guard and Wildlife Guard recruitment.

The Court set aside both the UPSSSC's decision and an earlier order of a single judge that had dismissed her plea. It directed the commission to conduct her PET within four weeks.

The Bench observed that denying the postponement of the PET because of pregnancy effectively forces a woman to choose between having a child and securing employment, which is unacceptable. It said such a decision interferes with a woman's right to reproduction as well as her right to employment.

Jaiswal had applied for the 2023 Forest Guard and Wildlife Guard recruitment. After clearing the written examination, she was scheduled to take the PET in February 2026. At the time, she was nine months pregnant and requested that the 14-km walking test be postponed until after childbirth.

However, the UPSSSC rejected her request, stating that the recruitment rules did not provide for postponing the PET.

The High Court disagreed, holding that a woman's pregnancy or marital status cannot be treated as a disqualification for public employment.

The Bench noted that while the rules did not specifically allow postponement, they also did not prohibit it. In such exceptional circumstances, the commission should have adopted a humane and sensitive approach, the Court said.

It further observed that more than two years had passed between the recruitment advertisement and the written examination, during which marriage and pregnancy were natural life events. Penalising a candidate for such circumstances would be contrary to the principles of equality and fairness, the Court added.

The Court directed that if Jaiswal clears the PET, medical examination and merit list, she should be appointed with all consequential benefits from the same date on which a lower-ranked candidate in the OBC women category was appointed.

It also ordered that one post in the category be kept vacant until the recruitment process concerning her is completed.