Mumbai: In good news for male government employees, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday held that a male job aspirant cannot be denied a job just because he fails to furnish a declaration affirming that he has not accepted dowry from in-laws. The HC said a mere failure in filing such a declaration cannot be a ground to deny the appointment.
The ruling was delivered by a bench of Justices Akil Kureshi and Shahrukh Kathawalla, while granting relief to Nilesh Pasarkar, who was disallowed from attending work despite being appointed as a clerk in the city civil and sessions court, Mumbai.
According to Pasarkar, he was given an appointment letter but was, however, barred from entering office as he could not submit the dowry declaration within the stipulated period.
This comes as per the provisions of the Maharashtra Dowry Prohibition Rule, 2003 and the Maharashtra Civil Service (Small Family Declaration) Rule, 2005.
These rules make it mandatory for every male government employee to submit or furnish a declaration affirming that he has not accepted dowry from his in-laws. This declaration, as per the rules, must be endorsed by the wife and the father-in-law of the man and also his own father.
In his petition filed through advocate Satish Talekar, Pasarkar claimed he could not submit such a declaration as his wife had left the matrimonial house within three months of their marriage. He further claimed the wife had also registered a criminal case against him under domestic violence and dowry act.
Subsequently, Pasarkar applied for an exemption from filing such a declaration form, however, he was disallowed from joining his work as a clerk.
The bench, having heard the submissions, noted that the circular issued by the HC in April 2005 requiring all the staff members of the subordinate courts to make such a declaration also does not prescribe the consequences of the failure of an employee in furnishing such a document.
“Such a declaration, therefore, would only enable the employer to gather necessary facts concerning its male employees in connection with the dowry acceptance.
If such dowry demand has been made and dowry accepted, the general principles of misconduct and the employer-employee relationship would take over the situation from then on,” the bench said.
“If an employee fails to make such declaration counter-signed by his wife, father or father-in-law, the employer may be justified in gathering reasons behind it and if sufficient material is available, to proceed departmentally for having taken dowry.
The employee would have a proper opportunity to defend himself in such proceedings,” the judges opined. The bench accordingly said held that a failure to furnish such a declaration would not suffice.
“Mere failure to produce such declaration duly supported by his wife, etc. would not automatically establish that the employee had accepted dowry. Mere non-filing of a declaration that too for special reasons automatically, therefore, may not result in adverse consequences,” the order authored by Justice Kureshi reads.
The bench opined that the situation can be looked from a different angle. “Whether dowry was demanded or not, whether accepted or not, if the husband and wife have uneasy relations, by the time, the husband receives an offer of appointment by the government, the wife may refuse to sign the declaration simply to frustrate his attempt to get a decent employment,” the bench concluded.
