JUDGMENT 1. - Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing order dated 21.09.2010 (Annex.-7) passed by respondent No. 1 whereby the respondent No. 1 rejected the case of the petitioner for providing appointment on compassionate ground for the reason that unmarried sister is not included in the definition of "dependent" in the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules 1996 and further prayed that the respondents may be directed to provide appointment on compassionate ground because the petitioner is unmarried sister of deceased Government servant late Kanti Prasad Pandit who was working as Junior Judicial Assistant in the High Court and died while in service on 28.06.2010. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's father late Daulal Pandit (Harijan) died and, thereafter, petitioner along with two other sisters was living with their widow mother and brother late Kanti Prasad Pandit who was working as Junior Judicial Assistant in the Copying Section of the Rajasthan High Court. The whole family was dependent upon late Kanti Prasad Pandit, therefore, after his death the petitioner being unmarried sister of late Kanti Prasad Pandit preferred an application for providing appointment on compassionate ground but the respondent Rajasthan High Court rejected the application of the petitioner for providing appointment on compassionate ground. 3. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Herald Hamilton v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 1988 (1) RLW 142 , interpreted the definition of "family", in which, it is held that definition of "family" is flexible, therefore, in the event of death of brother or sister, application can be considered for providing appointment under the rules on compassionate ground if it is found that the family members were dependent upon the Government employee. 4. In this case, the petitioner being unmarried younger sister and dependent upon late Kanti Prasad Pandit is very much entitled to get appointment on compassionate ground because in our country after the death of the father only protection is available for the unmarried girls to live with her brother or mother and they are required to be treated as dependent upon the brother and/or mother and the brother is required to treat the younger unmarried sister as daughter to perform the duty of protection of the life of the unmarried sister. Therefore, the rejection of the petitioner's candidature is totally illegal, therefore, prayer is made that communication impugned may be quashed and respondents may be directed to provide appointment to the petitioner being unmarried sister of late Kanti Prasad Pandit upon any post available in the High Court in the cadre of Class IV employee. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the High Court vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner and submits that appointment on compassionate ground can be given in accordance with the Rules of 1996 and in the said rules there is definition of "dependent" provided under Rule 2(c) in which unmarried sister is not included as dependent of the deceased Government servant, therefore, the petitioner cannot claim appointment under the Rules of 1996 on compassionate ground. 6. According to learned counsel for the respondents, the rejection is perfectly justified because the petitioner being unmarried sister of late Kanti Prasad Pandit cannot be treated as dependent of the deceased employee as per Rules of 1996. Therefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioner may be dismissed. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have perused the definition of "dependent" occurring in the Rules of 1996 which reads as under: " (c) "Dependant" means a spouse, son, unmarried or widowed daughter, adopted son/adopted unmarried daughter legally adopted by the deceased Government servant during his/her life time and who were wholly dependant on the deceased Government servant at the time of his/her death. 8. Upon perusal of the above definition, it is abundantly clear that whole purpose of this definition is to consider the dependency of the deceased employee. It is true that in specific words unmarried sister is not included in the definition but upon careful reading of the definition it is revealed that the purpose of the Rules of 1996 is to take care of the dependents of the deceased employee so as to save them from financial crisis. 9. I am in full agreement with the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner that definition of "family" cannot be narrowed down and the word "family" is a word of flexible description and not a technical term. At the time of deciding such application filed by unmarried sister who was dependent upon the deceased employee the ambit has to be determined having regard to the habits, ideas and socio-economic milieu of the parties. At the time of deciding such application filed by unmarried sister who was dependent upon the deceased employee the ambit has to be determined having regard to the habits, ideas and socio-economic milieu of the parties. Therefore, in my opinion, the unmarried sister of the deceased employee is required to be treated as daughter if father is not alive and sister is wholly dependent upon the brother. 10. In this case, obviously the petitioner's claim has been rejected on the ground that unmarried sister is not included in the definition of "dependent" but, in the opinion of this Court, a wide interpretation of dependent is required. Therefore, I hold that unmarried sister living in her brother's family as his daughter for the purpose of granting benefit under the Rules of 1996. 11. In view of the above discussion, this writ petition is allowed. Impugned communication dated 21.09.2010 is quashed and set aside with direction to respondent No. 1 that the petitioner may be provided appointment on compassionate ground in the cadre of Class IV employee.No order as to costs.Petition Allowed. *******