Discrimination against employees

News here.

https://www.telegraphindia.com/1150227/jsp/nation/story_5793.jsp#.VPO4KPmUct1

Also the employees availing this benefit are entitled for house allowance. 

Is this not a clear violation of article 14

You have two dqueries of different nature. Your contention is wrong thatnone of these reasons are gender specific, particularly about children and dependant family members, out of which several types of services are rquired to be taken care of only by ladies at home. 

It may be your own contention, but there is no violation of article 14 of the constitution in extending any benefit to any category of the employees of an organisation, where they have prescribed certain specific conditions also. Moreover, the SEBI has made very clear that Sebi will have sole discretion whether to approve an application for the special hardship leave.

You can well understand that certain family jobs are only lady-specific, which gents can't do.

Hello Sir,
Thanks for your reply and time.

How come (iii) health grounds of self or
(iv) dependent family members are gender specific. If parents of male employee needs to be taken care it cannot be normally expected from a working women. Also  if wife is seriously ill who will take care of her.So how come (i) "taking care of the family" is gender specific.

Arguably the only thing that can be gender specific here is taking care of children, and that too only if breast feeding is required. Other wise taking care of children has nothing to do with gender.

In this modern era I feel even women will happy if their partners are encouraged to take such tasks. And situation is changing and men are doing it to a large extent. Moreover the employees who get this benefit are paid house allowance. To me Denying men such a benefit is definitely  discrimination.

Do discretion power of SEBI matter here in any way? They also need to follow the law of the land right? 

Assume a different situation where all female employees are forced leave office in the evening by 5:30 pm based on the assumption that they have to take care of family.  So benefits of overtime working is extended towards only men. Will that be discrimination? In the above situation  only gender is reversed right?

Hope I have present my points well here.
Thanks

If not satisfied with the decision, you may take up the case with the management through your employees union with all these sorts of plea to get the benefit extended.

This is not a legal query.  However, such rules are framed everywhere in order to attract the female votes by the politicians in power and the so called discrimination is commonly prevalent in most of the organisations across the length and breadth of the country.  If you feel aggrieved, you may make a representation through the organised body to the authorities by bringing or highlighting the gender biased discrimination through such rules.

@   T. Kalaiselvan,
                                          This of course a legal query.

I clearly wanted know whether this act qualifies for discrimination under article 14 and whether it will be defended by article 15.

By this act I under stand that Employers are able to accommodate leave needs of employees. How ever I am against extending such benefits to only one gender. What about men , Transgender etc ? Why cannot they have this benefit?

@   T. Kalaiselvan, PS Dhingra

I can talk with SEBI management and unions and I may or may not get a positive reply. But Currently as you told  This seems to be the norm in our country. And I want to change that mot just for SEBI employees but for everybody . Next time when a Company/Organisation passes an act it should not be limited to one gender especially if the justification behind the act does not have to do anything with the gender. Which I think is only possible through Judicial Intervention for the matter at hand. A Judicial Intervention can set a clear direction for everybody in the future.
 

I hope somebody can help me in this regard and end gender discrimination againist men in India.