Compassionate appointments: India
(→Eligibilitys) |
(→Compassionate ground no guarantee for job: HC) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
[[Category:Name|Alphabet]] | [[Category:Name|Alphabet]] | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | [[Category:India|CCOMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS: INDIACOMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS: INDIA | |
| − | + | COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS: INDIA]] | |
| − | + | [[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary|CCOMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS: INDIACOMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS: INDIA | |
| − | + | COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS: INDIA]] | |
| − | + | [[Category:Name|ALPHABETCOMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS: INDIACOMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS: INDIA | |
| − | + | COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS: INDIA]] | |
| − | + | ||
=Eligibility= | =Eligibility= | ||
Revision as of 11:31, 14 March 2022
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 |
Eligibility
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.
