The main legal point established in the judgment is that the policy's exclusion of married daughters from seeking employment assistance on compassionate grounds is discriminatory and violates the Constitution of India. The court emphasized that marriage does not sever the relationship between a daughter and her parents and that the state has an obligation to support families in need, especially in the absence of male members.

JUDGMENT

Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. - The petitioner, by way of the extant writ petition, is seeking the following substantive reliefs:

"(i) That the Policy, Annexure P-6 may be quashed and set aside more specifically clause (2) which debars the petitioner being a married daughter of deceased Government employee from seeking appointment on compassionate grounds and respondents may be directed to modify/amend the policy by including married daughters in the categories of eligible persons for the purpose.

(ii) That annexures P-4 and P-5 dated 22.06.2020 and 09.07.2020, respectively be quashed and set aside.

(iii) That after striking down the aforesaid clause, respondents may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds to a post befitting her qualification (M.A. Hindi and diploma in computers) at the earliest.

2. Succinctly, the facts, emanating from the extant writ petition, are that on 08.05.2019, Shri Thakur Dass, father of the petitioner, who was a Class IV employee in the office of District Ayurvedic Office, Kullu, died in harness. It is further contended that the petitioner, her sister and mother are the survivors of Shri Thakur Dass and there is no male member in their family. As per the petitioner, she, her mother and sister, were dependant on late Shri Thakur Dass, and her mother and sister are unwilling to opt employment. The petitioner, who is M.A. (Hindi) and has diploma in Computers, applied on compassionate grounds and application for compassionate appointment was duly supported with the affidavits of her mother and sister purveying their 'No Objection'. Total annual family income of the petitioner's family is Rs. 63,000/- and to this effect the petitioner has annexed latest income certificate issued by the competent authority. It is averred that as per the Policy for providing Compassionate Employment, which is in vogue, ceiling of family income is Rs. 2,25,000/- for a family of four members, thus the income of the family of the petitioner is well under the ceiling. It is further averred that on 22.06.2020, application of the petitioner was rejected on the anvil that "there is no provision in the Policy for grant of employment assistance to married daughter of the deceased Government employee."

3. The petitioner, concisely, is seeking a direction of this Court to quash clause (2) of the above policy, which is extracted hereunder for ready reference, being discriminatory and unconstitutional:

"(2) To whom the Policy is applicable:- the employment assistance on compassionate grounds will be allowed in order of priority only to widow or a son or an unmarried daughter (in case of unmarried Govt. Servant, to father, mother, brother and unmarried sister) of:-

(a) A regular Government employee/Contractual employee, who dies while in services (including suicide), leaving his family indigent & in immediate need of assistance;

(b) A Daily wages worker, who dies while in service, leaving his/her family indigent & in immediate need of assistance:

... ... ... ... ... ... ..."

4. The case of the petitioner is that the above provision of the policy has no rationale for debarring married daughter(s) from compassionate employment. As per the petitioner, son of an employee, who dies in harness, remains son throughout his life, and likewise daughter remains daughter, being married or unmarried. Therefore, debarring a married daughter seeking employment assistance solely on the ground that she is married is unjust. It is averred that the policy is discriminatory and against the essence of Constitution of India, as it creates gender inequality. As per the petitioner, she is declared ineligible for being considered for employment assistance only for the reason that she is female and married.

5. On the above grounds, the petitioner is seeking directions of this Court to struck down Clause (2) of the policy and also quash Annexures P-4 and P-5, whereby the case of the petitioner for employ