According to a recent ruling by the Allahabad High Court, it would be deemed as discriminatory and a violation of Articles 14 and 15 to refuse compassionate appointment to daughters solely on the basis of their marital status.
The Secretary of the Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Institutional Services Board in Lucknow rejected the petitioner’s claim for appointment under the Dying in Harness Rules, which led to a petition being filed. The case was heard by Justice Alok Mathur’s bench. The petitioner’s father, Sunil Kumar Mishra, had passed away while working as a Class IV employee in the District Cooperative Bank on January 7, 2021. The petitioner, who is married, is currently residing with her mother, who has cancer, and taking care of her. The family is facing financial difficulties due to the sudden death of the petitioner’s father, prompting her to apply for compassionate appointment under Regulation 104 (V) of the Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Society Employees’ Service Regulation 1975 on March 1, 2021.
The Allahabad High Court heard a petition filed by a woman seeking compassionate appointment under Regulation 104 (V) of the Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Society Employees’ Service Regulation 1975, after her father passed away while serving as a Class IV employee in the District Cooperative Bank. The Bank Managing Committee had rejected the petitioner’s claim solely on the grounds that she was a married daughter, which did not fit within the definition of “family” under the 1975 Regulations. The bench referred to the case of Smt. Vimla Srivastava vs. State of U.P. and others, in which a similar provision from the Uttar Pradesh Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 was challenged before a Division Bench of the court. The court ruled that denying compassionate appointment to married daughters on the basis of their marital status would be unconstitutional and arbitrary, and that such daughters should be included within the definition of “family.”
The High Court found that the ruling in the Vimla Srivastava case is applicable to the present case, as the definition of “family” in the Dying in Harness Rules, 1974, and the Note attached to Regulation 104 of the 1975 Regulations are similar. Both include daughters but exclude married daughters, which the court deemed to be unconstitutional.
The bench rejected the argument that a daughter ceases to be a member of her father’s family or dependent on him after marriage, irrespective of social circumstances. In cases of compassionate appointments, dependency is determined based on specified relationships. It is possible that a deceased government servant’s son may not require compassionate appointment due to the family’s financial status. However, the decision regarding dependency is not based on the son’s marital status.
The High Court opined that the eligibility of a deceased government employee’s daughter for compassionate appointment should be decided by taking into account all relevant factors and circumstances that indicate whether she was dependent on the deceased. The exclusion of daughters from consideration solely based on their marital status would be discriminatory and violate Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution. The bench ruled that the exclusion of married daughters from the definition of “family” in the Note attached to subclause (V) of Regulation 104 of the 1975 Regulations is unconstitutional and illegal. Therefore, the High Court invalidated the use of the word “unmarried” in the Note and granted the petitioner’s request.
Source: https://lawtrend.in/excluding-daughters-for-compassionate-appointment-purely-on-the-ground-of-marriage-would-constitute-impermissible-discrimination-and-be-violative-of-articles-14-and-15-allahabad-hc/
You May Also Like:
Marital Status Of A Daughter Alone Not A Ground For Rejecting Claim For Compassionate Appointment: Reiterates Allahabad HC Govt. Policy Prohibiting Consideration of Married Women for Compassionate Appointment Is Unconstitutional: Madhya Pradesh HC 
Use Of Section 498-A IPC As A Weapon Rather Than Shield By Disgruntled Wives Becomes Common: Says Punjab and Haryana HC ‘Daughters Are Daughters Forever, Sons Are Sons Till They Are Married’: Bombay HC Upholds Direction Under Senior Citizens Act To Son To Vacate Flat Of Elderly Parents