Mukesh Kumar & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors.
Background
Jagdish Harijan, a Railways employee with two wives, died in service in 2014. His first wife sought a compassionate appointment for her step-son (the appellant), who was born to the second wife, but the Railways rejected the request on the ground that a Railway Board circular barred compassionate appointment to children born of an employee's second marriage. This rejection was upheld by the departmental appeal, the Central Administrative Tribunal, and finally the Patna High Court, prompting the appeal to the Supreme Court.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held the issue was squarely covered by its earlier decision in Union of India v. V.R. Tripathi, which had already struck down the same Railway Board circular as arbitrary and violative of Article 14, since a child born of a second marriage is deemed legitimate under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act and cannot be denied a benefit available to children of a first marriage. The Court additionally held that denying appointment solely because the claimant's mother was a second wife amounts to discrimination on the ground of "descent," expressly prohibited by Article 16(2) of the Constitution. It set aside the High Court's judgment and directed the Railways to consider the appellant's compassionate appointment application on merits within three months, while leaving it open to the authorities to verify that all other eligibility conditions were met.
Lesson Learnt
A child cannot be denied a benefit like compassionate government appointment merely because they were born to their father's second wife. The law treats such children as legitimate, and excluding them amounts to unconstitutional discrimination based on descent, which the Constitution expressly forbids.