Calcuta High Court

Putul Rabidas and ors. vs. Eastern Coalfields Ltd. and Ors. 2018(2)C LJ(C AL)1

Coram: Nishita Mhatre, Actg. C.J., Tapabrata Chakraborty and Dipankar Datta, JJ.

Relevant Para: Para 58, 35

Merely because she was married once and had gone out of the family but was thereafter
divorced would not deprive her of her status as an 'unmarried daughter'. In fact, she gets back
the status of unmarried daughter the moment she is divorced and her marriage was terminated
by a valid decree of divorce or as per the customary law.

Allahabad High Court

Vimla Srvastava and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. and Ors. 2016(1) ALJ 678,

Coram: Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, C.J. and Yashwant Varma, J.

Relevant Paras: 11, 12, 16

it is discriminatory for State to use marriage as rationale for practicing act of hostile
discrimination by denying benefits to daughter, when equivalent benefits were granted to son
in terms of compassionate appointment. Marriage does not determine continuance of
relationship of child. Marriage does not bring about severance of relationship between father
and mother and their son or between parents and their daughter. These relationships are not
governed by marital status Marriage cannot be regarded as justifiable ground to define and
exclude from who constitutes member of family. When State has adopted social welfare
policy which was grounded on dependency. Hence, excluding daughters from ambit of
expression "family" under Rules 2 (c) of Rules on ground of marriage would constitute
impermissible discrimination and in violation of Articles 14 and 15 of Constitution .