JUDGEMENT

This intra-Court appeal seeks to call in question a learned Single Judge’s order dated 07.07.2023 whereby, appellant’s W.P No.2129/2022 (S-RES) having been dismissed the prayer for a direction for compassionate appointment is negatived on the sole ground that after marriage, the appellant is not a member of the family of the deceased.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the appeal papers, we are broadly in agreement with the reasoning of the learned Single Judge who at para 5 has rightly observed, “… Having taken note of the fact that, daughter of the petitioner who is married and residing along with her husband, cannot be considered as a dependent of the deceased employee. In view of declaration of law made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharastra and another v. Madhuri Maruthi Vidhate reported in AIR 2022 SC 5176, I am of the view that, as the daughter of the petitioner is not a dependent on the earnings of her father, the case of the petitioner cannot be considered under compassionate ground. … ”

3. In more or less, a similar fact matrix was involved in W.A No.891/2023 (S-RES) between MRS.MEGHA J vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION, that was decided on 27.09.2023. At para 4, what we observed as under supports the view of the learned Single Judge “Learned Single Judge has rightly relied upon the Apex Court decision in State of Maharashtra vs. Madhuri Maruti Vidhate AIR 2022 SC 5176 to the effect that a married daughter residing in the matrimonial home ordinarily cannot be treated as a dependent on her father. Our scriptures injunct "bharta rakshati yavvane…" literally meaning that it is the duty of husband to provide maintenance to his dependent wife. That is how our legislations too are structured e.g., Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (applicable to all regardless of religions), Sections 24 & 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (applicable to Hindus, in a broad sense of the term), Section 37 of the Divorce Act, 1869 (applicable to Christians), Section 40 of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936 (applicable to Parsis), Section 20 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (applicable to all persons regardless of religion and marital status), Sections 36 & 37 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 (applicable to Muslims wives), etc., have been structured. No binding rule or ruling that guarantees right of maintenance to the married daughter residing with the husband qua the father, is brought to our notice. “

In the above circumstances, the appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and accordingly dismissed. Registry to send a copy of this order to the respondents by speed post, immediately.

CHIEF JUSTICE