Adoption At 18 Years Of Age Invalid: Rajasthan HC Denies Compassionate Appointment Plea Of Adopted Son
|The Rajasthan High Court denied a compassionate appointment to an adopted son, stating that his adoption at the age of 18 years was in direct conflict with the statutory requirement under Section 10(4) of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956.
The Jodhpur Bench dismissed a petition filed by an adopted son (petitioner) who sought a compassionate appointment following the death of his father, a government servant. The judgment upheld the decision of the authorities who had rejected the son’s application on the grounds of an alleged illegal adoption deed.
A Single Bench of Justice Arun Monga observed, “In the present case, it is borne out from the certificate of the petitioner that he was aged 18 years at the time of his adoption on 13.12.2013. It is not even the case of the petitioner that there is certain special custom, which permits adoption of a child regardless of his age.”
Advocate J.S. Bhaleria represented the appellants, while Advocate Sharwan Kumar appeared for the respondent.
The petitioner’s application for a compassionate appointment after his father's death was rejected despite it being submitted within the stipulated time. The respondents argued that the petitioner was not listed as a nominee in the service record of the deceased and referred to Section 10(iv) of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (the Act).
According to the provision, the adoption could not be considered legal since the petitioner was above 15 years of age at the time of his adoption.
The petitioner submitted the judgment in Mohan Singh Bhati v. The State of Rajasthan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9943/2022), wherein the Court had ruled in favour of the petitioner under similar circumstances. The said judgment relied on Section 16 of the Act, presuming the validity of a registered adoption deed unless disproved.
The High Court perused the case submitted but found it per incurium in light of the Division Bench's decision in Kumari Vinita Sharma v. Union of India which stated that the provisions of Section 10(iv) restricted adoption to individuals under 15 years unless a specific custom allowed otherwise.
The Court noted that at the time of his adoption, the petitioner was 18 years old and there was no special custom permitting adoption beyond the age of 15. Therefore, the presumption under Section 16 of the Act did not apply, as it has to be in compliance with the requirements of Section 10(iv) of the Act.
Consequently, the Court held that the petitioner’s adoption did not meet the statutory requirements to claim a compassionate appointment.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the petition.
Cause Title: Narendra Singh v. State Of Rajasthan & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:RJ-JD:19225)