Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 13721
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Anand Sharma, J
MANISHA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9265/2026
Important Points
Subject
Service Law - Compassionate Appointment
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Statutory Interpretation - Scope of Rules - Where the governing rules are not challenged, the court cannot grant relief that contradicts the express language of the rules, regardless of whether other categories (like married daughters) are included. (Para 6, 7)
Issues: Whether a married sister of a deceased government servant falls within the definition of 'dependent' for the purpose of compassionate appointment under the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sudesh Bijarnia
For the Respondents:
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge against the rejection of a compassionate appointment application for a married sister. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. strict interpretation of the term 'unmarried sister' within the definition of dependents. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. dismissal of petition due to the non-challenge of the underlying statutory rules. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
Order
1. Petitioner has challenged order dated 07.04.2026, whereby, application for seeking compassionate appointment filed by the petitioner has been dismissed by the respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the simple reason given in the order dated 07.04.2026 is that petitioner is although sister of the deceased government servant, yet she is married, whereas, as per Rule 2(c) of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 , only unmarried sisters are treated as dependent of deceased government servant. Learned counsel submits that under the definition of dependents even married daughter is considered as a dependent of deceased government servant, then there is no justified reason for not considering the married sister also as dependent of the deceased government servant.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
4. Rule 2(c) of the Rules of 1996 is being reproduced as under :
“(c) Dependent” means, -
(i) Spouse, or
(ii) Son including son legally adopted by the deceased Government servant during his/her life time, or
(iii) unmarried/widowed /divorced daughter including daughter legally adopted by the deceased Government servant during his/her life time, or
(iv) married daughter, if no other dependent of the deceased Government servant mentioned in clause (ii) and (iii) above is available, or
(v) mother, father, unmarried brother or unmarried sister in case of unmarried deceased Government servant, who was wholly dependent on the deceased Government servant at the time of his/ her death.”
5. This Court finds that rule making authority has quite specifically used term ‘unmarried sister’ in the definition of ‘dependent’, therefore, no mistake whatever has been done by the respondents in rejecting the application for seeking appointment vide order dated 07.04.2026.
6. So far as contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is concerned that if a married daughter is considered eligible for compassionate appointment then why not married sister, this Court finds that married daughter has been contained in the definition of dependents under Rule 2(c) whereas unmarried sister has not been included as dependent of deceased government servant.
7. Admittedly, the rules have not been challenged by the petitioner in the instant case, therefore, the relief as prayed by the petitioner cannot be granted.
8. In view of above, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed.
9. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
