In a major ruling, the Punjab and Haryana Excessive Courtroom as we speak dismissed a petition filed by the Union of India and the Railways difficult the appointment on compassionate grounds of the adopted daughter of a deceased railway worker. The courtroom upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal’s (CAT) 2023 order directing the Railways to think about her case, emphasizing the validity of her adoption underneath the Hindu Adoptions and Upkeep Act, 1956.
The case revolved round Sukhpreet Kaur, who sought employment within the Railways following the loss of life of her adoptive father, Vijay Kumar, a railway worker. The CAT, in its order dated October 25, 2023, had directed the Railways to think about her declare inside three months. Nevertheless, the Railways challenged this order, arguing that Sukhpreet’s adoption was not legally legitimate.
Railways’ objection to the adoption deed
The Railways contended that Sukhpreet’s adoption deed was registered on June 2, 2017, when she was over 20 years outdated. As per the Hindu Adoptions and Upkeep Act, 1956, a legitimate adoption should happen earlier than the adoptee attains majority. The division additionally identified that her Class 10 certificates, issued by the Punjab Faculty Training Board, didn’t point out Vijay Kumar as her father. As a substitute, the names of her organic dad and mom have been recorded, which, in keeping with the Railways, solid doubt on the legitimacy of her adoption.
It additional argued that because the adoption deed was registered a lot later than the date talked about for the precise adoption—January 12, 2010—it couldn’t be relied upon. The Railways maintained that the adoption was merely a authorized formality accomplished to safe a authorities job and shouldn’t be thought of legitimate.
Excessive Courtroom’s ruling
The Excessive Courtroom, after listening to arguments from either side, dominated that the objections raised by the Railways have been with out advantage. It held that an adoption deed, as soon as registered, carries a presumption of validity underneath Part 16 of the Hindu Adoptions and Upkeep Act. The courtroom noticed that an adoption could happen by means of non secular and customary practices and may very well be recorded in writing later for authorized functions.
The courtroom additionally cited a latest Supreme Courtroom judgment in Prema Gopal vs. Central Adoption Useful resource Authority and others, delivered on January 29, 2025. The apex courtroom had dominated that the date of registration of an adoption deed doesn’t decide its validity and that the adoption is deemed efficient from the date when the ceremony was carried out. The Excessive Courtroom discovered that in Sukhpreet’s case, the adoption had taken place in 2010, despite the fact that it was formally registered in 2017.
Moreover, the courtroom famous that college information typically don’t replicate adoptive dad and mom’ names, as academic boards usually acknowledge organic dad and mom. This, it stated, couldn’t be used as a floor to disclaim Sukhpreet’s declare.
Story continues under this advert
Reduction for the adopted daughter
The courtroom emphasised that the aim of compassionate appointments is to supply monetary reduction to the households of deceased staff. Denying Sukhpreet’s declare based mostly on technical objections would defeat the very goal of the coverage. It discovered no cause to intrude with the CAT’s order and dismissed the Railways’ petition.
