Imagine a young professional in India—talented, ambitious, and excited to make a mark. Suddenly, workplace challenges arise: maternity breaks threaten her job security, subtle harassment chips away at her confidence, and institutional policies feel skewed against her. What protects her in such vulnerable moments? Enter Article 15(3) of the Indian Constitution, a powerful yet often overlooked provision that empowers the State to create special protections for women and children.
When we hear about discrimination, most of us think only of negative restrictions. But Article 15(3) flips the script—it allows positive discrimination to create a level playing field. From Article 15(3) maternity rights to workplace harassment laws to broader welfare initiatives, this article is the bedrock of many transformative policies in independent India.
In this post, we’ll explore how Article 15(3) operates, why it’s crucial for Indian workplaces, and how it continues to shape gender justice in the 21st century.
Table of Contents
Bare Provision of Article 15(3)
Article 15(3) reads:
“Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.”
This seemingly short clause is the foundation of India’s legal and judicial framework for women’s welfare, workplace equality, and maternity protections.
Understanding the Spirit of Article 15(3)
At first glance, Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds such as religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. But Article 15(3) introduces an empowering exception: the State can make laws or policies for women’s special benefit without it being considered discrimination.
Think of it as the Constitution’s way of saying: “Equal treatment isn’t always fair unless we account for real-world disadvantages.”
Article 15(3) maternity rights and Gender Justice in India
Workplace Harassment Protections
- The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) was enacted under the guiding spirit of Article 15(3).
- It mandates Internal Complaints Committees, time-bound investigations, and penalties for non-compliant employers.
- Example: If an organization fails to set up an ICC, it can face fines up to Rs. 50,000.
Quick Takeaway: Article 15(3) empowers the State to safeguard women not only against physical assault but against psychological harm and structural inequities at work.
Maternity Rights
- The Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017 expanded paid maternity leave from 12 to 26 weeks.
- Organizations with more than 50 employees must provide crèche facilities.
- Work-from-home options post-maternity are also recognized, depending on the employer’s discretion.
Example Case Study: In Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (2000), the Supreme Court held that even daily wage workers are entitled to maternity benefits. This was a landmark recognition of women in unorganized sectors under Article 15(3).
Quick Takeaway: Article 15(3) is the constitutional lever behind maternity protections that ensure no woman must choose between career and motherhood.
Beyond the Workplace: Expanding Protections
Article 15(3) has enabled:
- Reservation of seats for women in panchayats and local bodies.
- Special provisions in criminal law such as Section 354 IPC (outraging modesty) and Section 376 IPC (rape laws).
- Schemes such as Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao and Janani Suraksha Yojana.
Quick Takeaway: 15(3) is not a workplace-only tool—it is the constitutional license for all gender-focused welfare programs.
Case Laws Shaping Article 15(3)
- Air India v. Nergesh Meerza (1981) – Struck down service rules penalizing air hostesses post-marriage.
- Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India (2008) – Court struck down discriminatory bans on women bartenders while clarifying scope of 15(3).
- Charu Khurana v. Union of India (2015) – Recognized entry rights of women in the Cine Costume Make-up Artists Association.
Quick Takeaway: Courts treat 15(3) as a progressive tool but also limit its misuse for paternalistic restrictions.
Practical Implications in the Workplace
- Employers must align HR policies with POSH Act and Maternity Benefit Act.
- Creating safe, inclusive spaces isn’t just compliance—it improves employee trust and retention.
Checklist for Employers:
- Set up Internal Complaints Committee (ICC).
- Ensure maternity leave provisions are accessible.
- Implement flexible workplace arrangements for new mothers.
- Train staff on harassment awareness.
Common Misconceptions about Article 15(3)
- Myth: 15(3) gives preferential treatment to women at the cost of men.
- Reality: It ensures substantive equality, leveling structural disadvantages.
- Myth: Maternity rights mean women cannot be asked to work hard.
- Reality: They simply prevent unfair burdens that push women out of the workforce.
Did You Know?
- India was among the first Asian countries to constitutionalize affirmative protections for women.
- The 2017 maternity leave duration in India is among the longest in the world—comparable to Scandinavian countries.
Internal Linking Suggestions
- Blog post on Article 14: Equality Before Law
- Blog post on POSH Act simplified
- Blog post on Maternity Benefit Act explained
- Blog post on Fundamental Rights of Women in India
External References
- ILO Report on Maternity Protections (2021)
- Ministry of Women & Child Development official schemes page
- Supreme Court of India judgments database
FAQs (People Also Ask)
What is the role of Article 15(3) in maternity rights?
Article 15(3) of the Indian Constitution empowers the State to make special provisions for women, including legislative measures like the Maternity Benefit Act and policies that protect maternity rights. This provision is the constitutional foundation for extending and securing maternity leave, ensuring workplace flexibility, crèche facilities, and health safeguards for women employees. By allowing “positive discrimination,” Article 15(3) turns maternity benefits from mere statutory entitlements into rights embedded in India’s fundamental law, helping women balance professional life with motherhood without fear of losing employment.
How does Article 15(3) affect workplace harassment laws?
Article 15(3) authorizes the State to take affirmative action against workplace harassment by enabling special legal protections for women. The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) was enacted using this constitutional power. It requires every workplace (public and private) to set up Internal Complaints Committees, comply with redressal mechanisms, and organize awareness programs against sexual harassment. The Supreme Court’s Vishaka Guidelines (1997), which paved the way for the POSH Act, also drew legal strength from Article 15(3) to address gender-based violence and guarantee the right to a safe and equal workplace.
Can Article 15(3) be challenged as discriminatory against men?
Article 15(3) allows “protective discrimination” in favor of women, which means certain rights and benefits may be reserved for women without violating equality norms. Courts have held that this special protection is not unconstitutional—even though technically it is a form of “discrimination”—because it aims to remedy historical disadvantages faced by women. However, this power is not unlimited; laws cannot be based entirely on gender stereotypes or serve as paternalistic restrictions, as clarified in cases like Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India (2008) and Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018). Challenges against such provisions for being “reverse discrimination” are usually not upheld if the special measure is reasonable, necessary, and advances substantive equality.
Which case laws interpret Article 15(3) broadly for gender justice?
Several Supreme Court and High Court cases have shaped Article 15(3) interpretation:
- Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): Laid guidelines for workplace sexual harassment protections, later enacted as the POSH Act.
- Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India (2008): Struck down gender-based employment bans, limiting paternalistic use of Article 15(3).
- Charu Khurana v. Union of India (2015): Recognized women’s right to work as make-up artists, fighting discriminatory trade association rules.
- P.B. Vijayakumar v. State of Tamil Nadu (1995): Upheld reservation of government jobs for women.
- Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (2000): Defended maternity benefits for all women employees, including daily wage workers.
These precedents clarify that Article 15(3) should advance real empowerment and actual participation rather than stereotyping or exclusion.
Does Article 15(3) apply only in government policy or also private workplaces?
Article 15(3) is a constitutional mandate for the “State,” guiding laws and policies. However, its effects extend to the private sector whenever protective laws (like POSH Act or Maternity Benefit Act) are enacted under its authority. For instance, the POSH Act covers all workplaces—public or private—and binds private employers to anti-harassment standards and maternity provisions. Recent judicial trends, such as the Kaushal Kishor judgment, suggest that certain fundamental rights (especially right to equality and livelihood) may now be enforced against private employers, making Article 15(3)-based protections practically relevant beyond government employment.
Templates & Checklists (Actionable Resources)
Employer Compliance Checklist under Article 15(3):
- ICC constituted
- Maternity leave policy aligned
- Crèche facilities available (if applicable)
- Sensitization workshops conducted
- Reporting protocols documented
Summary & Key Insights
- Article 15(3) allows positive discrimination for women and children.
- It underpins maternity rights, workplace safety, and broader gender equality measures.
- Landmark cases have clarified its scope while striking down misuse.
- Employers must integrate its principles into HR frameworks.
Conclusion & Call to Action
Article 15(3) isn’t just ink on parchment—it’s the legal backbone of gender-sensitive policies in India. Whether it’s maternity protections or protection from harassment, it ensures real equality, not just paper promises.
If you’re an HR professional, policymaker, or just a curious reader, I’d love to hear your perspective. Do you think India needs stronger Article 15(3)-based laws for private startups and gig workers? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
And if this helped you, spread the word—share this piece, subscribe for more deep-dives, and join our effort to make constitutional provisions accessible and actionable.
Author Bio
Adv. Arunendra Singh, a legal scholar, content strategist, and innovator who bridges traditional legal practice with emerging technologies. Currently at NLSIU, Bangalore, has been awarded by President of India for exceptional academic and leadership achievements. As Founder of Kanoonpedia, Arunendra has built a premier legal-education platform offering in-depth constitutional analyses, landmark case studies, and exam-focused guides.
He is also Co-Founder of Clicknify, the “Anti-Agency Agency” for startups. Using his proprietary Legal Clarity™ framework—which fuses doctrinal research, SEO-driven content architecture, and interactive study tools, he has elevated user engagement by over 70% and doubled session durations across both platforms. In his consulting practice, Arunendra applies expertise in digital marketing and UX clarity audits to help edtech ventures achieve measurable growth through data-driven design and strategic conversion roadmaps.
Trusted by top-tier law faculties, student associations, and early-stage startups, his hands-on workshops and advisory services have boosted organic traffic by 150% and transformed passive readers into active learners. Connect with Adv. Arunendra Singh for thought leadership in legal innovation and technology law: LinkedIn