Exclusion of Married Daughters From Compassionate Job Scheme Unconstitutional: Tripura HC

Striking down executive resistance against gender equality in state employment, the High Court of Tripura has ruled that the State cannot deny compassionate appointment to a married daughter on the technical pretext that no enabling scheme existed on the date of her father's death.

A single-judge bench of Justice Biswajit Palit was hearing a writ petition challenging the Finance Department's rejection of a married daughter's claim for a job under the 'Die-In-Harness' Scheme following her father's demise in 2018.

The High Court held that once the judicial strike-down of the discriminatory clause attained finality, the state authorities had no legal basis to reject the candidate's eligibility. The Court has following directions:

"The respondent-Department is hereby asked to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner No.2 as a married daughter of the deceased within a period of four months from the date of passing of this judgment."

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "So, there was/is no reason on the part of the respondent-Department to deny the said benefit to the petitioner No.2 of the present writ petition on the ground that on that date there was no policy of the government. So, by raising some technical issues there is/was no scope to say on the part of the respondent-Departments that on the date of death of the employee... the respondent No.2 being a married daughter was not eligible for compassionate appointment under Die-In-Harness Scheme... Thus, it appears that the view taken by the Finance Department showing in existence of the any scheme on the date of death of the deceased regarding compassionate appointment of the married daughter appears to be arbitrary and unconstitutional."

Background

The dispute arose after Dipankar Saha, a Group-D employee serving at Rajnagar RD Block, passed away in harness on June 21, 2018, at the age of 48, leaving his family in financial distress. Initial representations were made by his wife (Petitioner No. 1), who later requested that her daughter, Priya Saha (Petitioner No. 2), be given an appointment on compassionate grounds as she was overaged.

Although the SDM issued a dependent certificate confirming that Petitioner No. 2 was fully dependent on her mother and possessed the necessary educational qualifications, the Finance Department rejected the proposal on May 3, 2023, citing that there was no government policy to offer compassionate jobs to married daughters on the date of the employee's death under the then-applicable 2015/2017 scheme.

The petitioners argued that the exclusion clause in the notification dated May 19, 2017, was declared unconstitutional by a Single Bench in Debasree Chakraborty v. State of Tripura on December 18, 2019, which was affirmed by a Division Bench on February 8, 2022, in State of Tripura v. Debashri Chakraborty. Consequently, the State amended its policy on July 6, 2022, to include married daughters. The State resisted the petition claiming that the benefit was only applicable prospectively or under the terms enforced at the time of death.

Rejecting the State's technical objections, the High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the rejection order.

Case Details:
Case No.: W.P.(C) No.689 of 2025
Neutral Citation: 2026:THC:1181
Case Title: Sumitra Karmakar (Saha) and another v. The State of Tripura and others
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Purusuttam Roy Barman, Sr. Adv., Mr. Kawsik Nath, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Karnajit De, Addl. G.A.

Source: 2026 CaseBase(TRI) 403