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.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

a. Quash the order/endorsement dated. 03-08-2023 (Annexure-A) issued by Respondent No.2 rejecting the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment.

b. Direct the Respondents to consider the petitioner s case for compassionate appointment, without disqualifying her on the ground of being a married daughter, and appoint her to a suitable post commensurate with her qualifications.

c. Pass such other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity.

2 . The mother of the petitioner was an employee of the respondent - Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation. The mother dies in harness on 01.09.2021. The petitioner claiming to be the dependent daughter submits an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. The said claim comes to be rejected on the score that she is a married daughter and would not come within the definition of daughter as obtaining under the extant rules.

3. The issue whether a married daughter would be entitled to compassionate appointment or not is considered by this Court in W.P.No.104115 of 2021 disposed on 16.10.2025, wherein it is held as follows:

“The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 20.09.2021, by which, the claim of the petitioner for appointment compassionate ground comes to be rejected. The rejection of the application of the petitioner is on the score that she is a married daughter of the deceased Government servant. The issue whether married daughters would be entitled to otherwise need not detain this Court for longer dwelled deep into the matter. This Court in W.P.No.17788/2018 has held as follows:

“Half the world; and not even half the chance” is the cry of the petitioner in this petition on being denied consideration for appointment on compassionate ground on the death of her father on the score that she is “a married daughter”

2. Filtering out unnecessary details, the facts that are germane for consideration of the lis are:

Petitioner is the daughter of late Ashok Adiveppa Madivalar who was working as Secretary in the office of the Agriculture Produce Marketing Committee (hereinafter referred to as the ‘APMC’ for short) Kuduchi village, Belgaum District and died in harness.

3. On the death of the sole breadwinner of the family, petitioner, the daughter of the deceased employee, submitted a representation on 08.11.2016 for grant of appointment on compassionate grounds. In response to the said application of the petitioner, the respondents directed her to rectify the defects in the application and submit the same in a proper format. In terms of the direction, petitioner submitted her representation on 22.05.2017 along with necessary documents.

4. In reply to the request of the petitioner seeking appointment on compassionate grounds, the third respondent Joint Director (Administration), Department of Agriculture Marketing issued an endorsement rejecting the request on the ground that the Rules obtaining does not entitle the petitioner to seek an appointment on compassionate grounds on the score that she is the daughter of the deceased employee who is married. This rejection order dated 31.08.2017 was communicated to the petitioner on 12.09.2017 by the second respondent. It is the aforesaid orders dated 31.08.2017 and 12.09.2017 that are challenged in this writ petition by seeking to quash them by issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari.

5. Heard Sri.Manmohan.P.N., learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri.Subramanya, learned Additional Advocate General and Sri.R.Srinivasa Gowda, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 3. Respondent No.2 though served has remained unrepresented.

6. Sri.Manmohan.P.N., learned counsel ap