New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that married daughters cannot be excluded from compassionate appointment and their omission from the definition of “family” is manifestly arbitrary, unjustified and constitutionally untenable.
A bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe made the observation while setting aside an order of the Allahabad High Court that held the definition of “family” doesn’t include a married daughter for the purpose of compassionate appointment.
The top court was hearing an appeal filed by a woman, a married daughter of a deceased dealer, who challenged an order of the High Court that rejected her claim for appointment as a fair price shop dealer on compassionate grounds. The woman challenged a 2019 government order that excluded married daughters from the definition of “family”. The top court said the exclusion of a married daughter from the definition cannot be sustained as the object of allotment is to provide immediate succour to the family of the deceased dealer.
“The relevant considerations are dependency, financial need, residence, and the ability of the applicant to discharge the obligations attached to the dealership. Marital status bears no rational nexus to any of these considerations,” the bench said.
The apex court said the impugned provision proceeds on the assumption that upon marriage a daughter ceases to be a member of, or dependent upon, her parental family and such an assumption is constitutionally impermissible.
“Marriage neither extinguishes the bond between a daughter and her parental family nor furnishes a valid basis to presume absence of dependency. Contemporary social realities demonstrate that many married daughters continue to reside with, support, or remain dependent upon their parents. Equally, there may be sons who are not dependent upon the family despite being included within the definition. Dependency is a question of fact and cannot be conclusively determined by reference to marital status alone,” the bench said.’
