Back
K. MANMADHA RAO
S. Ammulu – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition for compassionate appointment (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. counterarguments regarding dependency of petitioner (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. legal frameworks for compassionate appointment criteria (Para 10 , 11 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. discrimination against married daughters is illegal (Para 12 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. discrimination against married daughters is unlawful. (Para 18) |
| 6. court's directive to appoint petitioner on compassionate grounds (Para 28 , 29) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief :
2. The grievance of the
Married daughters are entitled to compassionate appointment, and discrimination based on marital status violates Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution.
Married daughters are entitled to compassionate appointment on par with sons, as marital status does not negate their familial ties or dependency.
Point of law: undisputedly the petitioner is the elder daughter of the deceased and she along with her husband is staying at the place of the deceased even after her marriage. In the society, there a....
Exclusion of married daughters from compassionate appointment violates Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, affirming that marriage does not sever familial ties for employment eligibility.
Compassionate appointments cannot discriminate based on gender; excluding married daughters violates constitutional rights under Articles 14, 15, and 16.
Exclusion of married daughters from compassionate appointment violates constitutional rights to equality and non-discrimination; eligibility should be based on dependency, not marital status.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
