Introduction:

In a recent judgment, the Karnataka High Court addressed a case involving the rejection of a compassionate appointment application after the demise of a Canara Bank employee. K Lakshmi’s plea questioned the rejection based on her marital status, claiming gender discrimination. The court, represented by Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, delved into the intricate balance between gender considerations and the financial criteria for compassionate appointments.

Arguments:

The petitioner argued that her rejection was rooted in gender discrimination, contending that being a married daughter should not impact her eligibility. Canara Bank countered, stating that the rejection was based on her status as a married daughter, emphasizing the need for complete dependency to qualify for compassionate appointment. The bank highlighted the terminal benefits received by the petitioner’s mother after the employee’s demise.

Court’s Judgment:

Justice Magadum clarified that considering a daughter’s marital status in determining dependency does not inherently amount to gender discrimination. The court emphasized that compassionate appointments aim to address immediate financial crises in families. It ruled that the petitioner’s financial circumstances and her husband’s inability to support her are not valid grounds for compassionate appointment. The judgment outlined the importance of focusing on individuals wholly dependent on the deceased for day-to-day expenses.