Sisters fight for father's job

3 cases in High Court of Karnataka and 14 years later, younger sibling lands job with KSRTC on compassion
This legal battle for a ‘compassionate job’ between two sisters for their father’s KSRTC job went on for nearly 15 years, and survived even the deaths of their husbands.
Finally the younger sister prevailed.
N Krishnaswamy, who was working as a driver in the corporation died while in service on July 27, 2002.His wife S Nagarathna gave a representation to KSRTC to provide a job to their youngest daughter K Nandini Kumar on compassionate grounds. Nagarathna received all the monetary benefits and died in November 2007.
Nandini married the same year.
However, in October 2009, Sumalakshmi K, the elder daughter of Krishnaswamy submitted a representation to KSRTC stating that she needed the job more than her sister as her husband had died in 2008.
In an endorsement, KSRTC replied that her sister Nandini had already given a representation for the job on compassionate grounds and her case cannot be considered.
Sumalakshmi approached the HC which quashed the endorsement and directed KSRTC to consider her representation “in accordance with law” in January 2011.
KSRTC asked her to furnish documents to examine her claim. The younger sister also approached the HC challenging the rejection of her representation by the KSRTC. Her husband had died in November 2012. The HC directed KSRTC to consider her representation.
The KSRTC examined the representations of the sisters and found Nandini to be eligible for the job on compassionate grounds and she was appointed as a junior assistant/ data entry operator.
The matter came back to the HC again with Sumalakshmi challenging the appointment of her younger sister. In the latest case, Sumalakshmi contended that she was a widow, had no source of income and had dependent children and therefore eligible for the compassionate job.
The KSRTC’s advocate contended the wife of the KSRTC employee had sought employment for Nandini after her father’s death and she too had become a widow with a child to look after. Therefore the compassionate job given to her was right. Nandini’s advocate contended that she had become a widow at a very young age and had the responsibility of taking care of a female child.
The HC in its judgment said that the KSRTC’s decision to appoint Nandini to the job was not arbitrary or illegal and dismissed the claim of Sumalakshmi.