Indian High Courts rule on compassionate appointment eligibility

Indian High Courts have issued significant rulings regarding the criteria for compassionate appointments following the death of employees.

The Rajasthan High Court directed authorities to consider an appellant for a position 21 years after his father's death. The court ruled that a family's continued survival does not prove their financial crisis has ended and emphasized that the family's ability to maintain a dignified existence under Article 21 must be assessed. The bench noted the appellant applied within a reasonable period after reaching adulthood and rejected the denial based on hyper-technical grounds.

In a separate ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court declared it unconstitutional to deny compassionate appointments to married daughters while granting them to married sons. The court found that excluding married daughters based on marital status is arbitrary and discriminatory under Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution. The bench ruled that dependency is a matter of fact rather than a presumption based on marital status, noting that the bank's scheme did not explicitly distinguish between married and unmarried children.