Back
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, FARJAND ALI
Bhairu Lal Balai – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Heard.
2. This appeal arises out of the order dated 16.02.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby, the petitioner's claim for grant of bonus marks has been rejected.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the finding of the learned Single Judge that the petitioner is entitled to be included in the category of Institution, as provided in Rule 19 of the Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani, Homeopathy and Naturopathy Subordinate Service Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') read with Clause 7 of the advertisement, is not correct in law. He would submit that the petitioner is working in an institute, which is under the Central Government. Therefore, there is no reason why the petitioner should be excluded from the benefit of bonus marks. He would submit that in the case of Satya Dev Bhagaur & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.(Civil Appeal No. 1422 of 2022), the Supreme Court has held that the benefit of bonus marks to those who are engaged in the National Rural Health Mission or State Health Mission, are entitled to bonus marks. He would further submit that other similarly situated employees have been granted benefit but the petitioner has bee
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the relevant rules and advertisement provisions regarding the entitlement to bonus marks for employees of Ayurveda Researc....
Courts would be slow in interfering in policy matters unless policy is found to be palpably discriminatory and arbitrary.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the validity of the State of Rajasthan's policy to restrict the benefit of bonus marks to employees who have worked under different organization....
The State Government has the discretion to extend weightage to a particular class serving in the State of Rajasthan only, and such discretion cannot be deemed discriminatory or arbitrary.
Entitlement to bonus marks under the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 and the interpretation of the same in light of relevant case law.
The court established that the interpretation of 'similar work' by the appointing authority is valid unless proven arbitrary or malicious.
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
