In a laudatory move, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has said that the marital status of a daughter alone cannot be ground for rejecting her application for compassionate appointment. The Court was hearing a petition filed by one Mala Devi whose appointment was rejected because she was married.
A single-judge bench of Justice Manish Mathur in its judgment mentioned Smt.Vimla Srivastava vs. State of U.P. and Others where the exclusion of a married daughter from the ambit of the term “family” was held unconstitutional and the word “unmarried” struck down.
In this case, the bench headed by then Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court Justice DY Chandrachud had observed that “…while a son continues to be a member of the family and that upon marriage, he does not cease to be a part of the family of his father, a daughter upon marriage ceases to be a part of the family of her father. It is discriminatory and constitutionally impermissible for the State to make that assumption and to use marriage as a rationale for practicing an act of hostile discrimination by denying benefits to a daughter when equivalent benefits are granted to a son in terms of compassionate appointment….”
In the present case, Mala Devi’s father, who was a sweeper in the District Police Line Hospital, Bijnor, died in harness. Afterwards, an application was filed by his married daughter requesting appointment to his post on compassionate grounds under the U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974. This was rejected on the ground of her marital status.
The Court while deciding the petition said: “Once exclusion of married daughters from the ambit of expression ‘family’ under the aforesaid rules has already been held to be unconstitutional and the word ‘unmarried’ has already been struck down by two division benches of this Court as upheld by Hon’ble the Supreme Court, there is no further dispute required to be adjudicated upon due to which present writ petition is being decided at the admission stage itself.”
The Court said: “In view of the fact that petitioner’s candidature has been rejected only on the ground of her marital status, a writ in the nature of certiorari is issued quashing the order dated 9th October, 2019/10th October, 2018. A further writ in the nature of mandamus is issued commanding the opposite parties to reconsider petitioner’s candidature for compassionate appointment ignoring her marital status.”
The Court then ordered the concerned authority to pass a reasoned order within four weeks.