Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY
Sukla Das – Appellant
Versus
Kolkata Metropolitan Water & Sanitation Authority – Respondent
Judgment :
Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.
1. The petitioner sought for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to appoint her on compassionate ground under the die-in-harness category, consequent upon the death of her father, Late Kala Chand Das, and for quashing of the reasoned order No. 4L-03/2016 dated 12.07.2016 rejecting her claim. The writ petition further assails the vires of Rule 3(d) of the West Bengal Scheme for Compassionate Appointment notified vide Notification No. 251-Emp. dated 03.12.2013.
2. The petitioner’s father, Late Kala Chand Das, was employed under the Kolkata Metropolitan Water and Sanitation Authority since 01.03.1985 and died in harness on 03.05.2013 leaving behind his wife and three daughters including the petitioner. While the two elder sisters were married and settled, the petitioner, though married, had been residing with and maintaining her mother. Both sisters issued “No Objection” to the petitioner being considered for compassionate appointment. Accordingly, the petitioner applied on 28.05.2013 for appointment in any suitable post.
3. By communication dated 08.06.2015 (No. 1E-12/2006/535), respondent no.3 required the petitioner to
The exclusion of married daughters from compassionate appointment eligibility is unconstitutional, violating Article 14, as it lacks rational justification regarding financial dependency.
Compassionate appointment is not a right; eligibility depends on immediate financial need, procedural compliance, and previous claims exhaust opportunities for other dependants.
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....
Married daughters are entitled to compassionate appointment, and discrimination based on marital status violates Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution.
Compassionate appointments cannot discriminate based on gender; excluding married daughters violates constitutional rights under Articles 14, 15, and 16.
Married daughters are entitled to compassionate appointment on par with sons, as marital status does not negate their familial ties or dependency.
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
