Compassionate appointments: India
(Created page with "{| class="wikitable" |- |colspan="0"|<div style="font-size:100%"> This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.<br/>You can help by converting...") |
|||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
Opposing the plea of Bimla Devi, the secretariat had said she had already received Rs 7,41,673 as retirement benefits and that her daughter-in-law was employed. Interpreting the provisions of compassionate appointment under the law, the court said the underlying object of such scheme is to prevent the family of a government servant from financial destitution. | Opposing the plea of Bimla Devi, the secretariat had said she had already received Rs 7,41,673 as retirement benefits and that her daughter-in-law was employed. Interpreting the provisions of compassionate appointment under the law, the court said the underlying object of such scheme is to prevent the family of a government servant from financial destitution. | ||
| + | |||
| + | =Compassionate appointment/ dying in harness= | ||
| + | ==Dependent, married daughters covered by dying in harness rule: HC== | ||
| + | [http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=If-dependent-married-girls-eligible-for-jobs-05122015023008 ''The Times of India''], Dec 05 2015 | ||
| + | |||
| + | Rajesh Kumar Pandey | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''If dependent, married girls eligible for jobs''' | ||
| + | | ||
| + | The Allahabad high court ruled that married daughters are also entitled to jobs under the dyingin-harness rule. According to the rule, in case a government employee dies during service, his or her dependants will be given a job. | ||
| + | Allowing a writ petition filed by Vimla Srivastava of Azamgarh, a division bench of Chief Justice Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud and justice Yashwant Varma held that the exclusion of married daughters from the ambit of `family' of UP Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 is illegal and unconstitutional. | ||
| + | |||
| + | “Excluding daughter on the ground of marriage will violate the principles laid down under Article 16 of the Constitution (equality of opportunity in the matters of public employment),“ the court said, adding that no ci tizen can be discriminated on the grounds of gender. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The HC said if a son con tinues to be a son before and after marriage, the daughter also remains the same before and after marriage. There fore, it was not proper to deny equal benefits to daughters. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The court directed the state authorities to consider the claims of married daughters for compassionate appoint ments just like that of unmarried and divorced daughters. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The petitioner had moved the court challenging the validity of a clause in the UP Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules. Her father, an employee in the revenue department in Azamgarh, had died while on duty. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The Azamgarh district magistrate had rejected the petitioner's claim for appointment. | ||
Revision as of 14:10, 9 December 2015
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. Readers will be able to edit existing articles and post new articles directly |
Compassionate ground no guarantee for job: HC
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
From the archives of The Times of India 2007, 2009
New Delhi: The Delhi high court has held a person cannot claim appointment on compassionate grounds as a matter of right. The court said that appointment has to be given in cases of financial hardship.
The court’s remarks came on a petition filed by Bimla Devi against the decision of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) that has declined to appoint her younger son on compassionate grounds after the death of her husband who was employed as an assistant in the President’s secretariat.
‘‘Compassionate appointment is not to be given when there is no financial hardship. Compassionate appointment, it is well settled, is not a source of a recruitment nor it can be claimed as a matter of right,’’ said the bench of Justice Anil Kumar and Justice Mool Chand Garg said.
Opposing the plea of Bimla Devi, the secretariat had said she had already received Rs 7,41,673 as retirement benefits and that her daughter-in-law was employed. Interpreting the provisions of compassionate appointment under the law, the court said the underlying object of such scheme is to prevent the family of a government servant from financial destitution.
Compassionate appointment/ dying in harness
Dependent, married daughters covered by dying in harness rule: HC
The Times of India, Dec 05 2015
Rajesh Kumar Pandey
If dependent, married girls eligible for jobs The Allahabad high court ruled that married daughters are also entitled to jobs under the dyingin-harness rule. According to the rule, in case a government employee dies during service, his or her dependants will be given a job. Allowing a writ petition filed by Vimla Srivastava of Azamgarh, a division bench of Chief Justice Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud and justice Yashwant Varma held that the exclusion of married daughters from the ambit of `family' of UP Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 is illegal and unconstitutional.
“Excluding daughter on the ground of marriage will violate the principles laid down under Article 16 of the Constitution (equality of opportunity in the matters of public employment),“ the court said, adding that no ci tizen can be discriminated on the grounds of gender.
The HC said if a son con tinues to be a son before and after marriage, the daughter also remains the same before and after marriage. There fore, it was not proper to deny equal benefits to daughters.
The court directed the state authorities to consider the claims of married daughters for compassionate appoint ments just like that of unmarried and divorced daughters.
The petitioner had moved the court challenging the validity of a clause in the UP Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules. Her father, an employee in the revenue department in Azamgarh, had died while on duty.
The Azamgarh district magistrate had rejected the petitioner's claim for appointment.
