Govt. Policy Prohibiting Consideration Of Married Women For Compassionate Appointment Is Unconstitutional: Madhya Pradesh HC [Read Judgment]

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that the policy of the Government prohibiting consideration of married daughter from compassionate appointment is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

A full bench of the High Court comprising of Justice Sujoy Paul, Justice J.P. Gupta & Justice Nandita Dubey, observed that such a policy which deprives married woman from right of consideration for compassionate appointment violates equality.

The Court was answering a reference to it in which the question raised was whether in the matter of compassionate appointment covered by Policy framed by the State Government wherein, certain class of dependent which includes unmarried daughter a widowed daughter and a divorced daughter and in case of a deceased Govt. servant who only has daughter, such married daughter who was wholly dependent on Govt. servant subject to she giving her undertaking of bearing responsibility of other dependents of the deceased Govt. servant, Clause 2.2 and 2.4 can be said to be violative of Article 14, 15, 25 and 51A (e) of the Constitution.

The bench said that all forms of discrimination on grounds of gender is violative of fundamental freedoms and human rights and that the State should by appropriate measures modify law/policy and abolish gender-based discrimination in the existing laws, regulations, customs and practices which constitute discrimination against women. It said:

it can be safely concluded that Clause 2.2 to the extent it deprives married woman from right of consideration for compassionate appointment violates equality clause and cannot be countenanced. By introducing Clause 2.4, the Government partially recognised the right of consideration of married daughter but such consideration was confined to such daughters who have no brothers. Clause 2.2, as noticed, gives option to the living spouse of deceased government servant to nominate son or unmarried daughter. There is no condition imposed while considering a son relating to marital status. Adjective/condition of "unmarried" is affixed for the daughter. This condition is without there being any justification and; therefore, arbitrary and discriminatory in nature.  

Case name: Meenakshi Dubey vs. M.P. Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd. 
Case no.: W.A. No.756/2019
Coram: Justice Sujoy Paul, Justice J.P. Gupta & Justice Nandita Dubey
Counsel: Advocates Anubhav Jain, Ankit Agrawal, AG Shashank Shekhar

Click here to Read/Download Judgment

Read Judgment