SC denies compassionate job to ‘divorced’ daughter

SC denies compassionate job to ‘divorced’ daughter

Dhananjay.Mahapatra@timesgroup.com

New Delhi:15.09.2021

It is a classic case of a conspiracy that went awfully wrong in the final stretch. A woman took divorce on mutual consent months after the death of her mother, a government employee, to get a government job on compassionate grounds but ended without the job and her husband as the Supreme Court saw through the deception.

A bench of Justices MR Shah and Aniruddha Bose denied compassionate employment to the daughter of a deceased government employee when it found that she conspiratorially annulled her marriage on mutual consent after her mother’s death with the sole aim of cornering a government job.

Petitioner V Somyashree’s mother, who was employed with the Karnataka government as a second division assistant at Mandya district treasury, died in harness on March 25, 2012. Soumyashree was married at the time of her mother’s death and hence disentitled for compassionate employment. Six months later, she initiated divorce by mutual consent and on March 20, 2013, a trial court annulled her marriage. The next day (March 21, 2013), she applied to the authorities for appointment on compassionate grounds. The authorities rejected the application. Two years later, she moved the state administrative tribunal which too rejected her claim. But the Karnataka HC set aside the tribunal’s order and directed state government to consider giving her appointment on compassionate grounds. The state appealed against it before the SC.

Allowing the appeal, the SC bench said, “The chronology of dates and events would suggest that only for the purpose of getting appointment on compassionate grounds, the decree of divorce by mutual consent has been obtained. Otherwise, as a married daughter she was not entitled to the appointment on compassionate grounds.”

In blow to WB ‘organiser teachers’, SC says let qualified people teach primary students

Let qualified persons teach students in primary classes,” the Supreme Court said on Tuesday, refusing to entertain petitions seeking appointment of ‘organiser teachers’, who worked on the basis of a rule that was abrogated 40 years ago to spread education in the rural hinterland of West Bengal, as primary teachers, reports Dhananjay Mahapatra. Refusing to entertain petitions filed by organiser teachers and their associations, a bench of Justices DY Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and BV Nagarathna said, “Today qualified teachers are available. Organiser teachers don’t meet the qualification criteria prescribed by National Council for Teacher Education.”