The Orissa High Court on Tuesday delivered a strong message on gender equality in public employment, holding that a woman does not lose her right to compassionate appointment merely because she got married while her claim was pending. The court allowed a writ petition filed by Mani Machha, calling the State’s stand “obnoxious” and deeply unfair.
The judgment was pronounced by a Division Bench of Justice Krishna Shripad Dixit and Justice Chittaranjan Dash, who heard the matter and dictated the order on February 3, 2026.
Read also:- Humiliation Is Not Justice: Allahabad High Court Strikes Down Placard Punishment for Student
Background of the Case
Mani Machha is the daughter of a daily wage worker who served the irrigation department of Odisha for more than 30 years without any blemish. Her father died in harness in December 1999, leaving behind his widow and Mani as the sole dependent.
Within months of his death, Mani applied for compassionate appointment, a scheme meant to help families survive sudden financial distress caused by the death of a government employee. For years, the file moved slowly through government offices. In fact, senior officials had already approved her appointment.
However, in 2011, her claim was abruptly rejected. The reason: Mani had married in 2006 while waiting for the authorities to take a final call.
Aggrieved, she approached the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, which upheld the rejection. That order eventually reached the High Court.
Arguments Before the Court
Counsel for Mani argued that marriage cannot be used as a ground to deny compassionate appointment to a daughter when married sons continue to enjoy the same benefit. The plea stressed that such a distinction violates the constitutional guarantee of equality.
The State opposed the petition, relying on the Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990. According to the government, the rules define “family members” in a way that excludes married daughters.
Court’s Observations
The Bench was clearly unimpressed by the State’s defence.
“The petitioner applied for compassionate appointment immediately after her father’s death. She cannot be expected to put her life on hold because the authorities chose to sleep over her file,” the court observed.
The judges underlined that the right to marry is part of the right to life and personal liberty. “A daughter does not cease to be a daughter after marriage,” the Bench noted, adding that dependency and family responsibility do not vanish with a wedding.
The court also highlighted the glaring inconsistency in policy. “If marriage is not a disqualification for sons, it cannot suddenly become one for daughters. Such a distinction is plainly discriminatory,” the judgment said.
Referring to constitutional values and international conventions on women’s rights, the Bench stressed that excluding married daughters creates an artificial and unconstitutional classification.
Sharp Criticism of Official Delay
The judgment also recorded strong displeasure over the conduct of government officials. The court noted that approvals for Mani’s appointment had already been granted years earlier, even after her marriage.
“How the appointment was later denied remains shrouded in mystery,” the court remarked, calling the administrative handling of the case “mindless.”
The Bench acknowledged the hardship faced by the family for more than two decades due to official delay.
Read also:- Calcutta High Court Revives Dowry Death Case, Orders In-Laws to Face Trial in Andaman Mother
The Decision
Allowing the writ petition, the High Court quashed both the tribunal’s order and the government’s rejection of Mani’s claim.
The court directed the State authorities to issue an appointment order in her favour within eight weeks. It further warned that any delay would attract a penalty of ₹500 per day, recoverable personally from the erring officials.
With these directions, the petition was allowed.
Case Title: Mani Machha v. State of Odisha & Others
Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 32107 of 2011
Decision Date: 03 February 2026
