AP High Court rules daughters are part of parents’ family for life
Vijayawada:In a landmark judgment, Andhra Pradesh High Court has underlined that daughters remain a part of their parents’ family for life, irrespective of the fact whether or not they are married.
A single judge bench headed by Justice K. Manmadha Rao recently heard a writ petition challenging the denial of compassionate appointment to the married daughter of a man, who had served as a sweeper at a temple before his death in 2013.
Justice Manmadha Rao directed the temple authorities to appoint the petitioner woman as sweeper in place of her father, or in any suitable post with effect from the date when her father died. He ruled that all accompanying service benefits be also paid to her.
However, the single judge bench observed that the petitioner is not entitled to claim monetary benefits, going by the principle “no work-no pay.”
The High Court stated, “Sons and daughters, whether they are unmarried or married, are part of the family of their parents for the entire life. Just because the daughter got married, saying that she is not a member of her parents’ family is unfair. Because of her marriage, the daughter would not lose her status as a member of the family of her parents.”
Justice Manmadha Rao viewed the 1999 policy of the AP state critically, as it treated sons and daughters differently when it came to providing compassionate appointments depending on whether the daughter is married.
When the daughter of the man deceased (in 2013) approached the concerned authority, the executive officer asked her to furnish a copy of her divorce certificate, since she had sought the compassionate appointment on the ground that her husband had deserted her. She responded by explaining that she could not find her husband to secure the divorce certificate.
In 2021, she submitted a fresh representation to the concerned authority with a request to be appointed on compassionate grounds. However, as the authorities did not respond, she moved the High Court.
During the course of hearing, the court received information that as per a state government order of 1999, the married daughter of a deceased government employee could not be appointed on compassionate grounds unless there is no rival claim by the employee's spouse or other children, and if the married daughter remained dependent on the employee.
Justice Manmadha Rao took a critical view reasoning that there is no such condition for a married son to be eligible for compassionate appointment. He observed, “Married daughters are deemed ineligible solely because they are married. Showing discrimination towards a married daughter for her marital status, while no such ineligibility applies to a married son, appears to be arbitrary and discriminatory,” the AP High Court judge stated.
