The exclusion of "married daughters" from the definition of "family" in the compassionate appointment rules for government servants' dependents is discriminatory and violates Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution of India.

RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J.

Order of Reference

1. A Division Bench of this Court, by its order in Special Appeal No.

187 of 2017 dated 05.02.2018, has referred the following questions to be answered by a Full Bench of this Court:

(i) Whether any of the members, referred to in the definition of a “family” in Rule 2(c) of the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 (for short “the 1974 Rules”) and in the note below Regulation 104 of the U.P. Cooperative Committee Employees Service Regulations, 1975 (for short “the 1975 Regulations”) would be entitled for compassionate appointment even if they were not dependent on the Government servant at the time of his death?

(ii) Whether non-inclusion of a “married daughter” in the definition of “family”, under Rule 2(c) of the 1974 Rules, and in the note below Regulation 104 of the 1975 Regulations, is discriminatory, and is in violation of Articles 14, 15 and 16 in Part III of the Constitution of India?

2. The aforesaid questions were referred to the Full Bench in view of the conflicting judgments, of two Division Benches of this Court, in Namrata Sharma Writ Petition (S/B) No.391 of 2013 dated 26.03.2014 (judgment in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 391 of 2013 dated 26.03.2014), and Smt. Seeta Dhyani Special Appeal No.475 of 2017 dated 11.10.2018 (judgment in Special Appeal No. 475 of 2017 dated 11.10.2018).

3. While the Division Bench, in Namrata Sharma Writ Petition (S/B) No.391 of 2013 dated 26.03.2014, held that compassionate appointments were saved only on the basis of compassion to be shown to the deceased government employee, who died in harness leaving the family in utter penury; and a married daughter was no oasis for such a family, as she had to think of her own family comprising of her husband, children, etc, the Division Bench in Smt. Seeta Dhyani Special Appeal No.475 of 2017 dated 11.10.2018, following the earlier order of a Division Bench of this Court in Smt. Aruna Special Appeal No.176 of 2016 dated 26.09.2018 (judgment in Special Appeal No. 176 of 2016 dated 26.09.2018) and the judgment of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Smt. Vimla Srivastava Writ Petition (C) No.60881 of 2015 dated 04.12.2015 (order in Writ Petition (C) No. 60881 of 2015, dated 4th December, 2015), held that, since a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court had taken the view that exclusion of a “married daughter”, from the definition of a “family”, in Rule 2(c) of the 1974 Rules, was illegal and unconstitutional, and the earlier Division Bench of this Court had followed the judgment of the Allahabad High Court, there was no reason to take a different view.

4. In order to answer the questions referred to hereinabove, it is necessary to take note of the relevant provisions of the 1974 Rules and the 1975 Regulations. The 1974 Rules were made in the exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Rule 2

(a) thereof defines a “Government servant” to mean a Government servant employed in connection with the affairs of the State of Uttarakhand who (i) was permanent in such employment; or (ii) though temporary, had been regularly appointed in such employment; or (iii) though not regularly appointed, had put in three years’ continuous service in a regular vacancy in such employment. The explanation thereto defines “Regularly appointed” to mean appointed in accordance with the procedure laid down for recruitment to the post or service, as the case may be. Rule 2 (b) defines “deceased Government servant” to mean a Government servant who dies while in service. Rule 2 (c) is an inclusive definition, and defines a “family” to include the following relations of the deceased Government servant (i) wife or husband; (ii) sons; (iii) unmarried and widowed daughters; (iv) if the deceased was an unmarried Government servant, the brother, unmarried sister and widowed mother dependant on the deceased Government servant.

5.