The Madhya Pradesh High Court has delivered a landmark ruling, stating that denying the status of a family member to a divorced daughter of a government employee constitutes a violation of the fundamental right to equality. Justice Vishal Dhagat, while quashing an order from the Director General of Home Guards, emphasized that there is no justification for excluding a divorced daughter from the definition of family when a married daughter is included.
Background of the Case
The case involved Jyoti Shrivastava, whose father Shankarlal Shrivastava, a retired district commandant, passed away in 2017. Jyoti had sought to be recognized as her father's nominee for family pension. However, the DG (Home Guards) rejected her application on December 16, 2021, citing the Madhya Pradesh Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1976. According to these rules, a divorced daughter is not considered a part of the employee's family and is not deemed dependent on the employee.
Court's Observations
Justice Dhagat examined the provisions of the pension rules and noted that while married daughters are included in the definition of family under Rule 44(5), divorced daughters are explicitly excluded. The court found this exclusion to be arbitrary and discriminatory, violating Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
The judge remarked: "When a married daughter can be a member of the family, how can a divorced daughter not be? It’s violative of Article 14 of the Constitution." He further stated that there is no difference between an unmarried daughter, a married daughter, or a divorced daughter for the purposes of family pension eligibility.
Legal Implications
The High Court directed the authorities to reconsider Jyoti Shrivastava's case. If it is established that she was dependent on her deceased father, her application for family pension should be granted. The DG (Home Guards) has been instructed to pass an order within 90 days. This verdict sets a significant precedent for similar cases across the state, ensuring that divorced daughters are not discriminated against in matters of family pension.
