Supreme Court of India

Savita Samvedi v Union of India

decided 1996-01-30 (reporter citation not confirmed)19961 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
A Railway Board circular allowed a retiring employee's railway quarter to be regularised in the name of a son or unmarried daughter who was a railway employee, but not a married daughter.
Issue
Whether excluding a married daughter was discriminatory.
Held
The exclusion was gender discrimination. The circular was read down so that a married daughter who was a railway employee and was chosen by her father could get the quarter regularised. The appeal was allowed.
Principle
A rule that treats married daughters differently from sons without reason violates equality.
Cite this

Facts

  • A Railway Board circular allowed a retiring employee's railway quarter to be regularised in the name of a son or unmarried daughter who was a railway employee, but not a married daughter.

Issue

  1. Whether excluding a married daughter was discriminatory.

Held

  • The exclusion was gender discrimination. The circular was read down so that a married daughter who was a railway employee and was chosen by her father could get the quarter regularised. The appeal was allowed.

Cite this

Citation

Savita Samvedi v Union of India decided 1996-01-30 (reporter citation not confirmed)

Reported: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/877342/. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.