Diksha Nama W/O Shri Chandra ... vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2309 Raj/2

[2023/RJJP/003329]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

                     S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 241/2021

Diksha Nama W/o Shri Chandra Prakash Namdev, Aged About 27
Years, Resident Of Kheda Rasulpur, Village And Post Kaithoon,
District Kota (Raj.)
                                                                        ----Petitioner
                                        Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of
         Home, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2.       The Superintendent Of Police, Department Of Home,
         District Jhalawar (Raj.)
                                                                     ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)              :    None.
For Respondent(s)              :    Mr. Rupin Kala, GC

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

24/02/2023

Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with the

following prayer:

"It is, therefore, humbly prayed that Your Lordships may graciously be pleased to call for and examine entire record of admit and allow this writ the case, petition, I) by an appropriate order, direction, writ your lordships may kindly be please to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 29.9.2020 in all respect. The respondents may kindly be directed to accept and allow the application of the petitioner of filed for appointment on compassionate ground.

ii) by an appropriate order, or direction, writ your lordships may be please to direct respondents to give an appointment to the petitioner upon a suitable and permanent post in Class-III cadre on compassionate ground. The appointment may

[2023/RJJP/003329] (2 of 4) [CW-241/2021]

kindlybe givne effect since the date of application for all consequential benefits.

iii) By an appropriate order, of direction, writ your lordships may kindly be please to direct the respondents not to appoint any person in Class-III Cadre without given an appointment to the petitioner.

iv) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

v) Any other relief which is just and proper in the fact and circumstances of the case may kindly be given to the petitioner. The cost of the writ petition may be awarded in favour of the petitioner."

Contents of the writ petition indicates that father of the

petitioner died while in service on 27.02.2020. Contents of the

petition further indicates that the petitioner was dependent upon

his father and she submitted an application for getting

appointment on compassionate grounds. The application filed by

the petitioner was rejected by the respondents vide impugned

order dated 29.09.2020 by saying that the petitioner is a married

daughter and she is not entitled to get appointment on

compassionate grounds, as the married daughter does not fall

within the definition of "dependent" defined under Rule 2(c) of the

Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of

Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 (for short 'the Rules

of 1996').

Recently, the Larger Bench of this Court at Principal

Seat, Jodhpur decided the controversy involved in this petition

while deciding Civil Reference No.01/2022 (Priyanka

Shrimali Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.) vide judgment

dated 13.09.2022 observing thus:

[2023/RJJP/003329] (3 of 4) [CW-241/2021]

"Consequently, the reference is disposed of. There- framed question in the reference, is answered as under:-

The provision of Rule 2(c) of the Rules of 1996,which excludes the married daughter from definition of dependent prior to its amendment vide notification dated 28.10.2021, is discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 to 16of the Constitution of India and as such, the word 'unmarried' from the definition of 'dependent', is struck down. Further, in Rule 5 of the Rules of 1996 also the word unmarried daughters/adopted unmarried daughter, shall be read as daughters/adopted daughter.

The judgment in the case of Sumer Kanwar (supra) and all other judgments, which have followed the judgment in the case of Sumer Kanwar (supra), upholding the denial of compassionate appointment to married daughter, are overruled. As a consequence, it is directed that on account of striking down of the word 'unmarried' from the definition - (i) the same shall not effect any case, wherein compassionate appointment has already been granted under the provisions as they stood before this order; (ii) the same by itself would not provide a cause of action to any applicant and would apply to cases which are either pending before the competent authority and/or to the cases where litigation is pending on the date of this order only; (iii) the provisions and other requirements of the definition regarding the applicant being wholly dependent on the deceased government servant at the time of his/her death would be scrupulously applied; (iv) all the parameters as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court for grant of compassionate appointment, shall also be scrupulously followed and that (v) all other provisions of the Rules except the inclusion of the 'married daughter' in the definition of 'dependent', shall have full application."

[2023/RJJP/003329] (4 of 4) [CW-241/2021]

Perusal of the aforesaid judgment passed by the Larger

Bench of this Court indicates that the married daughter is also

entitled to get appointment.

In view of the ratio laid down by the Larger bench of

this Court in the case of Priyanka Shrimali (Supra), the present

petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to

consider the application of the petitioner and in case the petitioner

is found otherwise eligible, be granted appointment within a

period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of

this order.

Stay application and all pending application(s), if any,

also stand disposed of.

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

KuD/35

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)