The state's decision to frame recruitment policies which might exclude some potential candidates from consideration, per se does not result in discrimination. The left over or excluded category of individuals have to show something apart from the exclusion that the classification was arbitrary or hostile.

JUDGMENT :

S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

1. Common questions arise in all these petitions which challenge the denial of equivalence to certain class of candidates and bonus marks to various categories of medical service- related professionals (Laboratory Assistants and Pharmacists) seeking employment in the State through advertisement issued by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. The first batch of writ petitions (including D.B. CWP No. 12838/2018) challenge the amendment to the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service (Second Amendment) Rules, 2018, which in prescribing minimum qualification, narrowed three years' experience as Laboratory Assistant in State Government Hospitals on contract basis or through Service Provider Agencies. This is called ("the first batch" hereafter).

2. In the second category of writ petitions, the challenge is to amendments to concerned Recruitment Rules to the extent they confine award of bonus marks to a few specific category of employees who had worked in the health sector, such as Cooperative Societies, NGOs, ECHS and Paramilitary Forces (in relation to selection and recruitment to the post of Pharmacists and Lab Assistants respectively). In this batch (which includes D.B. CWP No. 12838/2018), it is contended that exclusion of relevant experience with other employers is arbitrary and discriminatory.

3. The petitioners in the first batch draw to the attention of the court that by notification dated 28.06.2013, apart from the educational qualification prescribed (as essential), i.e. Secondary or its equivalent with a diploma/certificate course in Medical Lab Technician from an institute recognized by the state government, the rules provided an option (apart from the secondary school certificate) of "one year's experience in medical lab run by State Government." This, it is submitted was the subject matter of previous writ petitions, when the leading to the decision by a Division Bench of this Court earlier. In the course of those proceedings, reliance was placed upon a letter dated 08.02.2016, which had stated that the stand of the State of Rajasthan was that "Government" under Rajasthan General Clauses Act, 1955, meant both, the State and the Central Government. The letter further stated that all authorities falling within Article 12 of the Constitution would be treated as "Government" for the purposes of the Rajasthan Medical & Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965.

4. It is submitted that the impugned rules have now sought to resile from the previously settled position, and have resulted in a large section of Lab Technicians and Assistants being rendered ineligible, inasmuch as apart from the educational qualifications prescribed, i.e. (a)(i) Senior Secondary with science or its equivalent or (ii) Any Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology from an institute recognized by the State Government or (b) having minimum three years' experience of working as Laboratory Assistant, Laboratory Technician in State Government Hospitals on contract basis or through Service Provider Agency, shall also be eligible.

5. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioners in the first batch, that the rules have created an extremely anomalous and arbitrary situation whereby experience of employees working in autonomous organizations, and societies funded by the state government, or even employees in the central organizations, such as ECHS, or other statutory corporations, stand excluded. It is submitted that there is no rationale for this exclusion, because the duties performed by such excluded category of individuals is no different from those employed by the state. It is pointed out on behalf of the petitioners, that the discrimination is stark and writ large on the face, if one considers the fact that not only those working as employees of the state government, but those employed through service providers, for state run hospitals, are deemed eligible, as long as they have three years' experience.

6. Learned c