THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES IN KARNATAKA & ANR.V. V. SOMYASHREE versus V. SOMYASHREE

Citation: [2021] 7 S.C.R. 649 · Decided: 13-09-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
649
THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES IN KARNATAKA & ANR.
v.
V. SOMYASHREE
(Civil Appeal No. 5122 of 2021)
SEPTEMBER 13, 2021
[M. R. SHAH AND ANIRUDDHA BOSE, JJ.]
Service Law – Compassionate appointment – Plea of –
Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds)
Rules 1996 – rr. 2 and 3 – Mother of the original writ petitoner was
employed with the Government of Karnataka as Second Division
Assistant – She died on 25.03.2012 – After her death, her daughter-
original writ petitioner initiated a divorce proceeding for divorce
by mutual consent u/s.13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – On
20.03.2013, she obtained a decree of divorce by mutual consent –
On 21.03.2013, the original writ petitioner submitted an application
for appointment on compassionate ground – Her application was
rejected – Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal also dismissed
her application – However, the High Court directed the appellants
to consider the application of the original writ petitioner for grant
of compassionate appointment – The High Court held that a divorced
daughter would fall in the same class of an unmarried or widowed
daughter – On appeal, held: From Rule 2 and Rule 3 of the Rules,
1996 it can be seen that only ‘unmarried daughter’ and ‘widowed
daughter’ who were dependent upon the deceased female
Government servant at the time of her death and living with her can
be said to be ‘dependent’ of a deceased Government servant and
are eligible for appointment on compassionate ground – Rule 2
and Rule 3 do not include ‘divorced daughter’ as eligible for
appointment on compassionate ground and even as ‘dependent’ –
The word ‘divorced daughter’ has been added subsequently by
Amendment, 2021 – However, in the instant case, at the relevant
time when the deceased employee died and when the original writ
petitioner made an application for appointment on compassionate
ground the ‘divorced daughter’ was not eligible for appointment
on compassionate ground and the ‘divorced daughter’ was not
within the definition of ‘dependent’ – Further, the chronology of
dates and events i.e. on 20.03.2013 decree of divorce by mutual
[2021] 7 S.C.R. 649
649
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
650
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 7 S.C.R.
consent was obtained and on 21.03.2013 an application was
submitted for appointment, the same would suggest that only for
the purpose of getting appointment on compassionate ground the
decree of divorce by mutual consent was obtained – Also, at the
time when the deceased employee died she was a married daughter
and therefore, also cannot be said to be ‘dependent’ as defined
under Rule 2 of the Rules 1996 – Therefore, considering the facts
and circumstances of the case, the High Court ought not to have
directed the appellants to consider the application of the respondent
herein for appointment on compassionate ground as ‘divorced
daughter’ – Thus, the impugned judgment and order passed by the
High Court is hereby quashed and set aside.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. Applying the law laid down by this Court in N.C.
Santhosh to the facts of the case on hand, this Court is of the
opinion that as such the High Court has gone beyond Rule 2 and
Rule 3 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on
Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996 by directing the appellants
to consider the application of the respondent herein for
appointment on compassionate ground as ‘divorced daughter’.
[Para 8][656-G-H]
2. From Rule 2 and Rule 3 it can be seen that only
‘unmarried daughter’ and ‘widowed daughter’ who were
dependent upon the deceased female Government servant at the
time of her death and living with her can be said to be ‘dependent’
of a deceased Government servant and that ‘an unmarried
daughter’ and ‘widowed daughter’ only can be said to be eligible
for appointment on compassionate ground in the case of death of
the female Government servant.  Rule 2 and Rule 3 reproduced
hereinabove do not include ‘divorced daughter’ as eligible for
appointment on compassionate ground and even as ‘dependent’.
As observed hereinabove and even as held by this Court in the
case of N.C. Santhosh, the norms prevailing on the date of
consideration of the application should be the basis of
consideration of claim for compassionate appointment. The word
‘divorced daughter’ has been aexdded subsequently by
Amendment, 2021. Therefore, at the relevant time when the
deceased employee died and when the original writ petitioner –
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
651
respondent her

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.