Daijiworld Media Network - Bengaluru

Bengaluru, June 29: In a significant ruling on service law and dependent rights, the Karnataka High Court has held that a married daughter who was dependent on a deceased government employee and residing with him is eligible to be considered for appointment on compassionate grounds.

A division bench comprising Justice S G Pandit and Justice K Rajesh Rai passed the order while hearing a petition filed by R Savitha of Jogimatti in Chitradurga district. The court set aside an order of the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal (KAT) and directed the government and Social Welfare department to reconsider her claim for compassionate appointment.

The Bench observed that amendments to the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996, which include married daughters within the definition of “family”, operate retrospectively and must be treated as part of the rules from inception. It held that a married daughter cannot be excluded solely on that ground if she otherwise satisfies eligibility conditions.

The court further clarified that the terms “family” and “dependent” must be interpreted broadly to include unmarried, married, divorced or widowed daughters, provided they were dependent on the deceased employee and were living with him at the time of death.

It reiterated that compassionate appointment is not a matter of right, but eligible dependents of deceased government employees are entitled to fair consideration under the scheme. The Bench held that Savitha’s application could not have been rejected merely on the ground that she is a married daughter.

The court also rejected the argument that the fact her mother is a retired government employee receiving pension could disqualify her from consideration under the scheme.

The case pertains to Savitha’s father, who worked as a Group-D employee (cook) at a pre-matric ST boys’ hostel in Challakere taluk and died in service on February 25, 2014. Savitha had applied for compassionate appointment following his death.

At the time of her application, the 1996 rules did not explicitly include married daughters within the definition of eligible dependents. Her request was rejected by the Social Welfare department and later upheld by the KAT, prompting her to approach the High Court.

The ruling also draws on earlier judicial precedent, including Bhuvaneshwari V Puranik vs State of Karnataka, where the High Court held that exclusion of married daughters from compassionate appointment was unconstitutional, leading to subsequent amendments to the rules by the state government.