In a significant development, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has directed the state government to reconsider a married daughter's plea for a job on compassionate grounds after her father's death in service. The court found that the authorities had wrongly denied her claim by misinterpreting income criteria and overlooking key judicial precedents on the rights of married daughters.
Background
Savita's father, a Junior Basic Trained Teacher in the state's education department, passed away while on duty in April 2012. Left behind were his wife and three married daughters, including Savita.
She first applied for a compassionate appointment in 2018, but the state rejected her claim saying the policy did not cover married daughters. She later went to court and won an order asking authorities to reconsider her case in light of an earlier judgment (Mamta Devi vs State of H.P.), which had affirmed that married daughters can also seek such appointments if they meet eligibility criteria.
Despite this, officials again rejected her application in 2023 this time citing two grounds: that she had applied after six years and that her family's annual income exceeded the limit.
Court's Observations
Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, who heard the case, took a firm view that both reasons given by the authorities were 'not tenable.'
On the delay claim, the judge noted that Savita had not applied immediately because, at that time, the government itself did not recognize married daughters as eligible.
"She only approached in 2018, and later after the Mamta Devi ruling, which clarified her right. So blaming her for delay is unjust," the judge said in essence.
The second rejection on income grounds drew sharper criticism. Authorities had treated her late father's family as having only two members, which raised the per-person income above the cut-off. But the court said this was a flawed calculation.
Read also:- Supreme Court Quashes Cheating Case Against Andhra Educator Over Alleged Fake Fire Safety NOC
Quoting from a previous ruling (Rakesh Kumar vs State of H.P.), the bench remarked,
"Simply because the daughter is married, this does not mean she loses her identity as a member of her father's family… If the court approved this criteria, it would also be endorsing gender inequality."
The court also pointed out that the state's own policy issued in 2019 presumes a family of four while assessing income. Even by that formula, the combined income of Savita's maternal and personal family was below the prescribed ceiling.
Read also:- Supreme Court Orders FIR Against Two CBI Officers, Says "Even Investigators Must Be Investigated"
Decision
Concluding that the authorities had applied the rules wrongly and unfairly, the High Court quashed the earlier rejection orders. It directed the state to consider Savita's case afresh for compassionate appointment and to pass an appropriate order within six weeks.
With that, the writ petition was disposed of. The matter now lies with the state government, which must take a fresh call on her employment request in line with the court’s directions.
Case Title: Savita vs State of Himachal Pradesh and Others
Case No.: CWP No. 3070 of 2023
Date of Decision: 05 September 2025
