Back
ASHOK KUMAR GAUR
Hariom Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the letter proforma dated 17.06.2022 issued by the respondent- Principal Medical Officer, Government Hospital, Kekri, District Ajmer counting only one year of rural service of the petitioner and the petitioner further seeks direction to consider the rural service rendered by him for more than three years and providing him incentive marks upto 30%, considering his service in rural area for more than three years.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Rural Medical Officer vide order dated 19.09.2008 under the Rajasthan Rural Medical and Health Services Rules, 2008 (hereafter 'the Rules of 2008'). The petitioner came to be posted at Community Health Centre, Kekri by order of the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Kekri, dated 03.10.2008.
3. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner had joined as per directions of the Chief Medical and Health Officer at Community Health Center, Kekri and he continued to work there upto 30.09.2019 and thereafter, the petitioner was transferred from CHC, Kekri to Dungarpur. The petitioner continued upto 11.12
The main legal point established is the interpretation and application of the Rajasthan Rural Medical and Health Services Rules, 2008, particularly in determining the eligibility of the petitioner fo....
The main legal point established is that administrative lapses should not deprive candidates of entitlements, and due care should be taken in issuing notifications and considering candidates' eligibi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the intention of the legislature to encourage doctors to work in rural areas and the relevance of following government directions in managing and t....
The interpretation of the eligibility criteria and grant of grace marks under the Government resolution dated 19-03-2019 was crucial in determining the petitioner's eligibility as an in-service candi....
It is well-settled that the expressions “means” and “means and includes” are exhaustive and specific in nature, unlike “includes” in isolation, which may indicate an inclusive definition.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
