Widowed Daughter-In Law Also Part Of Family, Can Seek Compassionate Appointment Under 1996 Rules: Rajasthan High Court

In a pertinent decision, Rajasthan High Court has held that a 'widowed-daughter-law' comes within the meaning of 'widowed daughter' mentioned as a 'Dependent' in Rule 2(c) of Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996.The Division Bench comprising Dr. Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Rajendra Prakash Soni was of the opinion that purposive interpretation has to be relied upon to assess the legislative intent behind such laws.“….while upholding the judgment rendered…in the case of Smt. Pinki (supra), for arriving at a final conclusion on the issue, is thus answered in the manner that the said term 'dependent' includes 'widowed daughter-in-law' in the term 'widowed daughter', while emphasizing the need for the State to provide solace to the survivors of the family under bereavement, whose plight is writ large, by giving appointment to the widowed daughter-in-law”, the bench sitting at Jodhpur noted in the judgment.Earlier, another Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court, in State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Smt.Pinki [D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.1915/2011], had left open the question of purposive interpretation of Rule 2(c) of the 1996 Rules, and the debate regarding the inclusion of 'widowed daughter in law' within the term 'widowed daughters'.“…this Court fails to understand… as to how the widowed daughter-in-law can be discriminated or distinguished as against other first layer components of the family, so far as the definition of the term 'dependent' as contained in Rule 2(c) of the Rules of 1996 (as amended in the year 2021) is concerned, just to deprive her of her legitimate right, in the just and warranting circumstances, of compassionate appointment on the death of the sole breadwinner…”, the court further observed after referring to the precedents and factual matrix of the case.Sushila Devi v. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary Department Of Public Works P.w.d., State Secretariat, Jaipur & Anr., 2023 LiveLaw (Raj) 1, relied upon by the court, also revolved around the same circumstances as in the current case. In Sushila Devi, the widowed daughter-in-law was given compassionate appointment after the mother-in-law died in harness, followed by her son's demise. Similarly, in Pinki, the High Court utilised the concept of purposive interpretation to hold that a 'widowed daughter' is also a 'widowed daughter-in-law' who serves her in-laws and children. To buttress this proposition, Rule 5(1) of the 1996 Rules was analysed which mentions the conditions for compassionate appointment. It states that appointment won't be possible where the spouse or at least one of the sons, unmarried daughters, adopted son/adopted unmarried daughter of the deceased government servant is already employed on a regular basis in a state/central enterprise at the time of employee's death. However, the said rule does not mention a widowed daughter who is otherwise a 'dependent' as per Rule 2(c).“…The exclusion of the “widowed daughter” in Rule 5(1) is made only with a view that such a daughter is supposed to serve and support her in-laws and her own children also, therefore, even if she is having some employment with the institutions referred in sub-rule(1) of Rule 5, the other dependents shall be having admissibility for compassionate appointments…”, the court had noted in Pinki back then.BackgroundThe deceased employee, Late Gawari Devi was working as Class IV employee in the Office of Executive Engineer, Public Health and Engineering Department, Rural Division, Udaipur. Late Gawari Devi had already lost her two sons during her lifetime. The petitioner, Durga Devi, was the wife of Late Basant, the second son of Late Gawari Devi. Gawari Devi too expired in 2013, leaving her daughter-in-law who is the petitioner to fend for the entire family.Though the other family members supported the compassionate appointment of the widowed daughter-in-law, her representation was rejected on the ground that Rule 2(c) of the 1996 Rules does not envisage the appointment of 'daughter-in-law' as the 'dependent'. Later, a single judge bench of the High Court refused to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner on the same ground, in addition to the justification that an inordinate delay had occurred for seeking legal remedy.Further ObservationsAbout the respondent counsel's argument that the petition can't be entertained on account of inordinate delay, the court held that the parameters of delay can't be applied in the current case.“…it is not a delay which could attract the disqualification of the appellant for the compassionate appointment…in the present circumstances, where the whole family was dependent upon a Class-IV employee, namely, Late Smt. Gawari Devi, it is not a time period which has elapsed to enable them to tide over the crisis; this was only three years of intervening period when the appellant approached this Hon'ble Court…”, the court added about the...

Widowed Daughter-In Law Also Part Of Family, Can Seek Compassionate Appointment Under 1996 Rules: Rajasthan High Court

Sebin James

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sebin James

Widowed Daughter-In Law Also Part Of Family, Can Seek Compassionate Appointment Under 1996 Rules: Rajasthan High Court

Sebin James

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sebin James

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers