SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 229

M.M.PUNCHHI, K.VENKATASWAMI
Savita Samvedi – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Punchhi, J.-Special leave granted.

2. This appeal voices a cry for gender justice.

3. The two appellants before us are a married daughter and father. The second appellant was in service of the Indian Railways. While in service, he was allotted quarter No. 30/3, Railway Colony, Kishan Ganj, Delhi. He was due to retire on 31.12.1993. It is a different matter that he was permitted to retain the railway quarter for the maximum permissible period of eight months thereafter upto 31.8.1994. Much prior to retirement, the second appellant on 18.3.1993 requested the railway authorities concerned in permitting his married daughter, the first appellant to share the accommodation allotted to him on the basis that she was a railway employee at Delhi described as "Sr. S.O./T.A./D.K.Z.". He pointed out that he had two sons working out of Delhi, but neither of them was a railway employee, whereas his married daughter was one, and he needed her to look after him and his ailing wife. His request was granted favourably in-as-much as on 31.5.1993 permission was granted to the first appellant to share railway quarter of her father with effect from 16.3.1993 with the rider that she would not be ent













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top