Rajasthan High Court's ordered to pay the married daughter considering her dependent on the government employee

The daughter submitted an application to the department to get the posthumous benefits, due to which Shakuntala Bhati did not nominate any family member in her service book, the pension department rejected the application saying that the payment of the outstanding amount, pension, gratuity, and encashment of earned leave is not payable as she is a married daughter as per Rule 54 and Rule 56 of Rajasthan Civil Services Rules Pension Rules 1996.

The department had rejected the representation made for benefits in this regard. After this, a writ petition was presented before the Rajasthan High Court stating that the State Government had amended the Compassionate Appointment Rules 1996 for the dependents of deceased government employees of Rajasthan and issued a circular to add the married daughter to the dependents.

The court was informed that rejecting the petition was illegal and unconstitutional. The Rajasthan High Court, after hearing the petitioner, issued notices to the Secretary of the Rajasthan Government, PHED Department, Chief Engineer Rajasthan, Chief Engineer Jodhpur, Superintendent Engineer Jodhpur, and others.

After this, after hearing both the parties and accepting the petition, citing the decision given by the Supreme Court in the context of providing the amount under the government rules of succession, Ramchandra Talwar and others vs Devendra Kumar Talwar and others and Sharbati Devi vs Usha Devi, said that an order has been passed to make the payment to the petitioner and other legal representatives on applying to the department within four weeks in the prescribed form.