New Delhi, July 31 -- The Supreme Court has ruled that a government policy limiting compassionate appointments to only divorced or deserted daughters is unconstitutional. A Bench of Justice M M Sundresh and Justice Prasanna B Varale struck down the Bihar Government's condition dated December 10, 2014, while hearing the appeal of a woman whose application had been rejected after her father's death because she was neither divorced nor deserted.
"This court has repeatedly held that any classification differentiating a daughter from a son is, per se, unconstitutional," the bench observed. It added that restricting eligibility only to divorced or deserted daughters "cannot be sustained in the eye of law."
The state had argued that a married daughter is ordinarily expected to leave her parental home, but the judges rejected this reasoning. "There cannot be a presumption in law that, after marriage, a daughter severs her ties with her parental family and resides with husband in her matrimonial home," the Court said.
The case arose from a Patna High Court judgment that upheld the rejection of the appellant's claim. Authorities had relied on two grounds: an objection raised by her maternal uncle and the 2014 policy. Counsel for the appellant pointed out that the uncle had already given a no-objection certificate and argued that the policy discriminated against married daughters, violating Article 14 of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court noted that the appellant had been living with her parental family despite her divorce not being formally recognised in law. It held that authorities could not deny her claim by adopting an "unduly technical approach."
Setting aside the High Court's order, the bench directed the Bihar government to consider the appellant's claim for compassionate appointment on its merits within eight weeks of receiving the judgment.
Published by HT Digital Content Services with permission from Millennium Post.