2020 Supreme(Raj) 9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
ARUN BHANSALI, J.
Naveen Patidar S/o Shri Bagadu Lal – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Jaipur and ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10729 of 2018
Decided On : 03-01-2020
For the Petitioner: Mr. Suniel Purohit.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rajat Arora for Mr. K.S. Rajpurohit, AAG.
Headnote:
Rajasthan Medical & Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 - Rule 19 - Appointment on the post of GNM - Contractual basis - Denial grant of Experience certificate - Seeking a direction to respondents to issue experience certificate to petitioner in view of Clause-7 advertisement and allow petitioner to join services as GNM at Community Health Center - Petitioner participated in said selection process and was found eligible in list of candidates belonging to OBC category – Though petitioner had higher marks than the cut-off but petitioner was not offered appointment, petitioner approached this Court by filing SBCWP - Held, It is no doubt true that the petitioner had actually worked for a day only, which aspect is admitted by petitioner, fact that denial of appointment took place despite merit took place at time of earlier recruitment for no fault of petitioner and directions were given by Division Bench for grant of notional benefits, petitioner cannot be deprived of grant of certificate on the ground that after appointment petitioner had worked for one day only with respondents - Division Bench has denied grant of arrears and, therefore, the said judgment has no application to facts of present case - Writ petition is allowed.
ORDER :
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to issue the experience certificate to the petitioner in view of Clause-7 of the advertisement dated 30.5.2018 (Annex.13) and further a direction to allow the petitioner to join the services as GNM at Community Health Center at Pipar City Jodhpur.
2. During the course of submissions relief has been confined to issue of experience certificate.
3. It is inter alia submitted in the writ petition that an advertisement was issued for appointment on the post of GNM on contractual basis in the year 2007. The petitioner participated in the said selection process and was found eligible in the list of candidates belonging to OBC category. Though, the petitioner had higher marks than the cut-off but the petitioner was not offered appointment, the petitioner approached this Court by filing SBCWP No.3806/2013 seeking a direction to offer him appointment on the post of GNM from the date persons lower in merit were given appointment, which writ petition was dismissed on 17.7.2013.
4. The petitioner preferred SAW No.1035/2013, wherein, by interim order dated 21.5.2015, the respondents were directed to give appointment to the petitioner on provisional basis as per his merit, the petitioner was accorded appointment on 10.7.2015. Whereon, the Division Bench disposed of the appeal by its order dated 5.4.2016 directing the appointment to be effective from the date persons lower in merit to the petitioner were given appointment with notional benefits. The petitioner joined the services on 23.10.2015.
5. It is claimed that as the petitioner suffered serious injuries in an accident, he sought leave, however, the petitioner was not permitted to join back despite requests made by the petitioner.
6. It is then contended in the writ petition that another advertisement dated 30.5.2018 was issued by the respondents for recruitment to the post of Nurse Gr.II for eligible candidates.
7. The petitioner applied vide application dated 28.6.2018, however, for the purpose of getting bonus marks in terms of Rule 19 of the Rajasthan Medical & Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 (‘the Rules of 1965’), the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents for grant of experience certificate, which was denied.
8. It is submitted that the action of the respondents in denying grant of experience certificate is not justified and is arbitrary and, therefore, the same deserves to be set aside.
9. Submissions have been made that while deciding the Special Appeal filed by the petitioner, it was specifically directed that appointment of the petitioner was required to be treated effective from the date persons less meritorious to the petitioner were appointed and the petitioner was accorded notional benefits and once notional benefits have been directed to be accorded to the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled for issuance of experience certificate w.e.f. from the year 2010 and, therefore, the action of the respondents in this regard cannot be justified, the petitioner be accorded experience certificate as per notional experience of the petitioner.
10. A reply to the writ petition has been filed by the respondents inter alia indicating that pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 21.5.2015 in the Special Appeal, an order dated 10.7.2015 was issued by the respondents directing the petitioner to give joining on or before 20.7.2015, however, the petitioner approached the respondents on 23.10.2015 to give joining, when the CM&HO, Jodhpur, gave posting to the petitioner at Pipar City where the petitioner joined on 28.10.2015, however, the petitioner attended the office at Pipar City only for one day and thereafter he remained absent continuously till 27.11.2016 and kept on sending leave applications. Whereafter, the petitioner re-appeared before the SMO, Pipar City, on 27.1.2017.
11. It is submitted that for the purpose of claiming an experience certificate, the same can be