[2025:RJ-JP:40348-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 974/2025 Ms. Loveena Babbar W/o Shri Ravi Rawat, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Flat No. - 604, Sixth Floor, Luxurious Heavan Apartment, Jagatpura, Jaipur. ----Appellant Versus 1. Ravi Rawat Son Of Shri Anand Singh Rawat, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Plot No. 45, Brij Puri, Jagatpura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Public Health And Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur 3. The Chief Engineer, Public Health And Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 4. The Assistant Engineer, Phed, Sub-Division V (South) Malviya Nagar, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Tanveer Ahamad with Ms. Priya Prakash For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU Judgment 06/10/2025 1. This is an appeal preferred by the wife of the respondent-writ petitioner who filed a complaint against her husband for having been granted compassionate appointment wrongfully. On her complaint the State Government set aside the appointment granted to the respondent-writ petitioner. It was stated by the appellant in her complaint that the respondent-writ petitioner had concealed the fact of having a married status in his application [2025:RJ-JP:40348-DB] (2 of 3) [SAW-974/2025] moved for seeking compassionate appointment. She has also stated that she was working and even a daughter-in-law is entitled to seek compassionate appointment, her husband could not have been granted compassionate appointment. 2. The learned Single Judge having considered both the aspects reached to the conclusions that the disclosure of marital status by the son would not have any effect with regard to the appointment on compassionate grounds. There is no condition laid down in the rules for the purpose of reflecting as to whether the son is married or not. The learned Single Judge has also relied on Mohammed Imran Vs. The State of Maharashtra [(2019) 17 SCC 696], Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India [(2016) 8 SCC 471], Pawan Kumar Sharma Vs. Union of India [(2023) 12 SCC 317] and Ravindra Kumar Vs. State of UP [(2024) 5 SCC 264], to reach to the aforesaid conclusions. 3. We are in agreement with the view as taken by the learned Single Judge that so far as claim for compassionate appointment is concerned, the marital status of claimant has no relation or effect on the compassionate appointment to be granted to the claimant. 4. The other aspect regarding the appellant being in service is also found to be without any basis. It would be apposite to quote the provisions of Rule 5 of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment Of Dependents Of Deceased Government Servants (Amendment) Rules, 2021 as under: “5. Appointment subject to certain conditions :- (1) When a Government servant dies while in service one of his/her dependents may be considered for appointment in Government service subject to the condition that employment under these rules shall not be admissible in cases where the spouse or at least one of the sons, unmarried daughters, adopted son/adopted [2025:RJ-JP:40348-DB] (3 of 3) [SAW-974/2025] unmarried daughter of the deceased Government servant is already employed on regular basis under the central/any State Government or Statutory Board, Organisation/Corporation owned or controlled wholly or partially by the Central/any State Government at the time of death of the Government servant or at the time of appointment of the dependent. Provided that this condition shall not apply where the widow seeks employment for herself (2) Appointment under these rules shall be given on the condition that the person appointed on compassionate ground shall maintain properly the other family members who were dependent on the deceased Government Servant and on furnishing an undertaking in writing that he/she shall maintain properly the other family members who were dependent on the deceased Government Servant. If subsequently, at any time, it is proved that such dependent family members are being neglected or are not being maintained properly by him, the appointment may be terminated by the Appointing Authority after providing an opportunity to the compassionate appointee by way of issue of show cause notice asking him to explain why his services should not be terminated.” 5. Thus, merely because wife of the son of the deceased government servant is in service would not be an impediment for seeking compassionate appointment. In these circumstances, the order passed by the learned Single Judge does not warrant any interference. The appeal appears to have been filed only for personal vengeance. It is a settled law that justice cannot be used for personal vengeance/purpose. Cost of amount of Rs. 5000/- to be deposited in the Children’s Home. 6. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ Rahul/Diksha-26