E-Paper
Married daughter can’t be denied compassionate appointment: HC
The bench questioned and struck down the provisions of a 2002 policy in Punjab, which made a married daughter ineligible for consideration of appointment on compassionate grounds.
Chandigarh The Punjab and Haryana high court has ruled that a daughter, if otherwise eligible, can’t be denied compassionate appointment, merely because she has got married.
The high court bench of justice AG Masih struck down the provisions of Punjab government’s compassionate appointments policy of 2002, which did not have ‘married daughter’, as a ‘dependent family member’ for consideration for appointment on compassionate grounds. The high court said that classification, if any, has to be based upon reasonableness, which is justifiable on the anvil and touchstone, furthering the policy for which the same had been framed.
Violation of gender equality would amount to violation of Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution as guaranteed to all citizens of India, which guarantee equality; protection against discrimination on the basis of caste, sex etc; and protection of life and liberty, respectively.
The HC directed the Punjab DGP to issue appointment letter within one month to the woman, who was declared ineligible in 2015, citing that her marital status was a bar against consideration for appointment.
Following this, the woman, Amarjit Kaur, had approached the high court, challenging the decision. Daughter of a head constable, Kashmir Singh, who died in October 2008, she now lives with her widow mother, Jasbir Kaur along with her husband and kids. An internal report upon verification of source of income had stated that they were surviving on pension benefits of the late head constable and that family was sustaining ‘with great difficulty’.
“Equality cannot be achieved, unless there are equal opportunities for all. If a woman is deprived at the threshold by rendering her ineligible for consideration merely because of her marital status of being a woman, especially when the same is not true for the man, would amount to discrimination on the basis of gender identity,” the bench observed.
It said that the determinative factor to ascertain eligibility for consideration for appointment is the financial status of the family. “The only reason why the petitioner has been deprived appointment under the scheme is that she is a married daughter of a deceased government servant, whereas had she been unmarried or had it been the son, despite the marital status, the claim would have been considered. If this is not discrimination, what else can it be termed?,” the bench questioned and struck down the provisions of the 2002 policy, which made a married daughter ineligible for consideration of appointment on compassionate grounds.
