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

2022 Supreme(AP) 1145

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATI
K. Manmadha Rao, J.
Ulavapati Kalpana – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 17973 of 2021
Decided On : 01-08-2022

Advocates appeared:
T.S.N. Sudhakar, Advocate, for the Appellant; GP, for the Respondents

A married daughter is entitled to compassionate appointment if she is dependent on the deceased Government employee and subject to satisfying the conditions and instructions issued on the scheme from time to time.

Headnote:

COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT - MARRIED DAUGHTER - G.O. MS. NO. 612, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SER-A) DEPARTMENT DATED 30.10.1991 - G.O. MS. NO. 350 DATED 30.07.1999 - A married daughter is entitled to compassionate appointment if she is dependent on the deceased Government employee and subject to satisfying the conditions and instructions issued on the scheme from time to time.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner, a married daughter of a deceased Government employee, sought compassionate appointment under the Social Security scheme. The authorities rejected her claim on the ground that she was a married daughter and living with her husband. The petitioner challenged the rejection order.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the petitioner was entitled to compassionate appointment as she was dependent on her deceased father and satisfied the conditions and instructions issued on the scheme. The court relied on G.O. Ms. No. 612, General Administration (SER-A) Department dated 30.10.1991 and G.O. Ms. No. 350 dated 30.07.1999, which provide that a married daughter may be considered for compassionate appointment if she is dependent on the deceased Government employee.

Issues: Whether a married daughter is entitled to compassionate appointment under the Social Security scheme if she is dependent on the deceased Government employee.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner was entitled to compassionate appointment as she was dependent on her deceased father and satisfied the conditions and instructions issued on the scheme. The court relied on G.O. Ms. No. 612, General Administration (SER-A) Department dated 30.10.1991 and G.O. Ms. No. 350 dated 30.07.1999, which provide that a married daughter may be considered for compassionate appointment if she is dependent on the deceased Government employee.

Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the authorities to consider the petitioner's case for compassionate appointment within six weeks.

JUDGMENT

Dr. K. Manmadha Rao, J. - This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:-

    '...to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for not provided compassionate appointment to the petitioner who is married daughter of deceased employee in RC No B6/60/2019 Endorsement dated 05.10.2019, as illegal, arbitrary, against the law and violation of Art 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment under compassionate grounds as dependent of the deceased employee and pass such other order or orders.......'

    2. The case of the petitioner is that the mother of the petitioner Smt. Boddu Aruna made a representation dated 01.05.2019 along with medical certificates requested the respondents for voluntary retirement from services due to suffering breast cancer and affected the lungs. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent vide letter dated 02.05.2019 directed the 5th respondent to examine the medical report and submit detailed report within 10 days. Pending consideration of voluntary retirement, the petitioner's mother died on 08.05.2019. As the petitioner name is showing as Nominee in the registers, she is only one dependant. On 09.05.2019 the respondent authorities have paid funeral expenses of Rs. 15,000/- to the petitioner through the Assistant Social Welfare Officer, Kavali. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation to the 3rd respondent for providing compassionate appointment along with all relevant documents. It is further stated that on 05.09.2019 the 5th respondent addressed a letter to the 3rd respondent that the petitioner does not have any movable and immovable properties, she is only one daughter, she got married with unemployed person and they got two children and they are dependants on the deceased employee and also the 5th respondent recommended the petitioner to provide compassionate appointment and to grant pensionary benefits. Subsequently, the 3rd respondent rejected the petitioner's case for compassionate appointment on the ground of married daughter vide an endorsement vide Rc. No. B6/60/2019, dated 05.10.2019. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed.

    3. Counter affidavit is filed by the 3rd respondent while denying all the allegations made in the petition, contended that, the spouse of the deceased employee was died prior to the death of the deceased employee and the petitioner is the only daughter of the deceased employee who was already married and living separately with her husband and two children. As per G.O. Ms. No. 612 General Administration (Services-A) Department, dated 30.10.1991 in Para 2(iii) as well as G.O. Ms. No. 350 General Administration (SER.A) Department, dated 30.07.1999 it clearly mentioned that it is the choice of the mother/spouse to select the married daughter or unmarried minor daughter for appointment under the social security scheme. The spouse of the deceased employee was died prior to the death of the deceased employee and the deceased employee having one and only daughter who married prior to the death of spouse of deceased employee and also lives separately with her husband. The marriage daughter who is living with her husband cannot be a dependant on mother. As such the petitioner is not entitled for getting a job under the compassionate appointment. Hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

    4. Reply affidavit is filed by the petitioner while reiterating the averments made in the petition denied all the allegations made in the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent. It is further stated that in similar circumstances, this Court considered the case in WP No. 16242 of 2013 dated 20.06.2013 for compassionate appointment to the children of the deceased employee was extended to the married

        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 Back to top