SBCWP14936/2009 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14936/2009 Urmila Devi Yadav Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others Date of Order ::: 10.05.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri Sanjay Mehla, Counsel for petitioner #### By the Court:- This writ petition has been filed by petitioner against order dated 23.06.2009 by which the Government has declined to grant her compassionate appointment and held that she was not eligible for such appointment in view of explanation (B) of Rule 6 of the relevant Rules notified by the Government's notification dated 01.10.2002. The petitioner has been denied compassionate appointment because she is married and only unmarried daughters are considered eligible for such appointment. Contention of learned counsel for petitioner is that petitioner is only daughter of deceased army personnel and therefore the Government in appropriate cases may consider giving appointment to even a married daughter. Learned counsel in this connection referred to the letter dated 30.04.2009 sent by the District Soldier Welfare Officer, Neem-ka-Thana and has argued that SBCWP14936/2009 // 2 // even that Officer recommended the case of the petitioner. The letter which is relied on by the petitioner was in fact sent to the District Collector, Sikar but that was prior to rejection of the application of the petitioner by the Government on 23.06.2009. The Government has given the reasons in its order why the petitioner has not been considered eligible. Even in the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 married daughter is not considered as one of the dependents of the deceased government servant. The reason which has been assigned by the Government, cannot be said to be arbitrary or unreasonable. The writ petition being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//