Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 4242 MP
Judgement Date : 26 March, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 26th OF MARCH, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 28825 of 2021
Between:-
MS. RASHMI DHANAK D/O LATE SHRI BABULAL
DHANAK , AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
UNEMPLOYED 19, NEW ABHISHEK NAGAR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI L.C. PATNE - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. DISTRICT ORGANISER TRIBAL WELFARE
DEPARTMENT UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI MANISH NAIR - DY. ADVOCATE GENERAL)
T h is petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
With the consent of learned counsel for parties, the matter is finally heard. In the instant petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 17/06/2019 passed by the respondent No.2 by which the application filed by the petitioner was rejected on the basis of Clause 2.4 of the Compassionate Appointment Scheme dated 29/9/2014.
Counsel for petitioner submits that Clause 2.2 of the Policy 2014 is contrary to law held by the Division Bench of this Court in WA No.756/2019 (Meenakshi Dubey Vs. M.P. Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd & Ors.) . This Court after considering the same policy held that Clause 2.2 of the Policy so far it deprives a married daughter from consideration for compassionate appointment is violative of the provisions of Article 14, 16 and 39(a) of the Constitution of India. Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN SOUMYA RANJAN DALAI Date: 2022.03.26 A women citizen cannot be excluded for any appointment on compassionate basis 17:04:45 IST
on the ground of sex alone. It was further held that the daughter even after marriage
remains part of the family and she could not be treated as not belonging to her father's family.
Counsel for State could not dispute the same that the issue raised in the present petition is squarely covered by the judgment of Meenakshi Dubey (supra).
In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order dated 17/06/2019 rejecting the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment is quashed and the respondent No.2 is directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner on merit for compassionate appointment in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of communication of the order.
With the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed and disposed of
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE soumya
Signature Not Verified VerifiedDigitally Digitally signed by SAN SOUMYA RANJAN DALAI Date: 2022.03.26 17:04:45 IST
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!