Smti.Tarapratima Kujur v. The Chief Secretary And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/612/2025 Smti. Tarapratima Kujur Vs The Chief Secretary and Others Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar ... for the petitioner Mr. Rakesh Kumar ... for the respondents December 17, 2025 [AKB] Item No.10 1.

The writ application has been preferred praying for setting aside of the Impugned Press Note dated 21.11.2025 issued by the respondent No. 4, whereby the name of the petitioner figures at Serial No. 41 of the ineligible list for compassionate appointment on the ground that the petitioner is married and no more dependent of the deceased employee and all consequential order/orders passed on the basis of the same and further direction directing the respondent No.4 to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in terms of the process initiated by the respondent No. 4 in the year 2024 and to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground.

2.

On hearing the learned counsels for the parties and perusal of the materials on record, it appears that the petitioner herein was considered for employment on compassionate ground by the respondent authorities vide an order dated 31.07.2012 Prothrapur, wherein the petitioner was asked to

furnish certain documents. It has been categorically noted in the said order dated 31.07.2012 that:- "Her candidature was rejected on the ground that she was under age during the year 2006. Now since she attains the age above 18 years she has come forward with all supporting documents for her appointment on compassionate ground in place of her father."

3.

From the impugned notice dated 21.11.2025 it appears that the petitioner's name figures at 41 of the provisional list of "ineligible" candidates for compassionate grounds. It appears from the said entry that the father of the petitioner died on 01.08.2005. It has been noted in the remarks column that the petitioner was found ineligible as she is a married daughter and no more dependent on the deceased employee. 4.

It appears from the documents annexed to the writ application, that the petitioner's right for compassionate appointment accrued on the death of her father on 01.08.2005 i.e. twenty years back. The impugned Notification is dated 21.11.2025. The respondent authorities had taken up her cause on 31.07.2012, when the petitioner admittedly attained the age of 18 years. It thus appears that the petitioner herein being the daughter of the deceased was aged about 11 years on the date of death of the deceased and admittedly unmarried at the time of the death of the employee being her father, on 01.08.2005 and as such, it can safely held that the petitioner was dependent on the deceased employee at the time of his death.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment of the Calcutta High Court passed by a Coordinate Bench in which the petitioner relies upon paragraphs 5, 33, 68, 72, 107, 110, 111, 112 and paragraph 113 being the relevant among other paragraphs is reproduced herein below:- "113.

Consequently, the offending provision in the notification dated April 2, 2008 (governing the cases of Arpita and Kakali) and February 3, 2009 (governing the case of Purnima) i.e. the adjective "unmarried" before 'daughter', is struck down as violative of the Constitution. It, however, goes without saying that after the need for compassionate appointment is established in accordance with the laid down formula (which in itself is quite stringent), a daughter who is married on the date of death of the concerned Government employee while in service must succeed in her claim of being entirely dependent on the earnings of her father/mother (Government employee) on the date of his/her death and agree to look after the other family members of the deceased, if the claim is to be considered further." 6.

In the present case the petitioner has succeeded in prima facie showing this Court that she was not even married on the date of the death of the concerned employee and was aged about only 11 years and was thus entirely dependent on the earnings of her father (government employee) on the date of his death being 01.08.2005.

7.

Accordingly in view of the judgement relied upon in Purnima Das and others (Supra) this Court directs that the notification in The Daily Telegram dated 21.11.2025 in respect of the petitioner Smt. Tarapratima Kujur is hereby set aside and quashed.

8.

Thus, relying upon the their letter dated 31.07.2012, the respondent authorities herein are directed to consider the prayer of the petitioner for compassionate appointment by way of her application dated 26.11.2025 afresh, in view of the

observations of this Court in this case and the judgement of the Larger Bench passed in Purnima Das and others (Supra) within a period of thirty days from the date of this order on hearing the petitioner herein and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law.

9.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of along with all connected application, if any.

10.

Parties to act on the server copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Court.

[Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.]