SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Raj) 581

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
ARUN MONGA, J.
Dr. Mohd Yunus, S/o. Late Sharee Abdul Wase & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary Department of Ayurved, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha And Homeopathy (Ayush) Department, Government of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 16633, 13771, 13775, 15713 of 2023
Decided On : 21-05-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Mahendra Kumar Trivedi, Mr. Narendra Singh Rajpuorhit, Dr. Kshamendra Mathur.
For the Respondent: Dr. Praveen Khandelwal, AAG, Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG, Mr. Piyush Bhandari, Mr. Priyanshu Gopa for Mr. Vinit Sanadhya.

IMPORTANT POINT
Statutory rules governing recruitment must be adhered to, and any advertisement provisions that contradict these rules are invalid. Candidates are entitled to cumulative age relaxation if supported by the rules.

Headnote:

AGE RELAXATION - UNANI MEDICAL OFFICERS RECRUITMENT - RAJASTHAN AYURVEDIC, UNANI, HOMOEOPATHY AND NATUROPATHY SERVICE RULES 1973, RULE 9 - The court interpreted Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani, Homoeopathy and Naturopathy Service Rules 1973, which allows for cumulative age relaxation for candidates belonging to OBC and those with prior government service. The court emphasized that the advertisement's provisions contradicting the statutory rules were invalid, leading to the decision to quash the non-cumulative age relaxation clause and direct the respondents to grant cumulative age relaxation to the petitioners.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, registered Unani Medical practitioners from the OBC-NCL category, challenged their exclusion from the merit list for Unani Medical Officer positions advertised by the state. They sought to quash the advertisement's age limit conditions, arguing for cumulative age relaxation based on their prior service and OBC status.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the respondents failed to consider the petitioners' objections regarding their exclusion from the merit list. It ruled that the advertisement's age relaxation provisions were inconsistent with the statutory rules, which allow for cumulative age relaxation.

Issues: Whether the petitioners were entitled to cumulative age relaxation under the Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani, Homoeopathy and Naturopathy Service Rules 1973, and whether the advertisement's provisions were valid.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that statutory rules take precedence over advertisement provisions. It established that candidates are entitled to cumulative age relaxation if permitted by the rules, and that the state cannot deviate from its previous interpretations of these rules without proper amendment.

Final Decision: The writ petitions were allowed, the non-cumulative age relaxation provision in the advertisement was quashed, and the respondents were directed to grant cumulative age relaxation to the eligible petitioners.

JUDGMENT :

Arun Monga, J.

1. Facts and issue involved are since analogous, the aforementioned five writ petitions are being decided vide this common order. For convenience, facts and recitals of annexures are being referred from SBCWP No.16633/2023.

2. Grievance of the petitioners in all these petitions stems out of a provisional list dated 11.09.2023 (Annex.6) and a final list dated 22.09.2023 (Annex.8) prepared pursuant to the advertisement No.04/2023 for appointment on the post of Unani Medical Officers. Their candidature was excluded from the merit list. They also seek quashing of condition of advertisement in not granting relaxation in age limit on cumulative basis.

3. Briefly speaking, relevant facts of the case as pleaded in SBCWP No.16633/2023 are that the petitioner is a registered Unani Medical practitioner. He belongs to Other Backward class Non Creamy layer (OBC-NCL). He was appointed with NRHM and serving a Unani Medical Officer under NRHM.

3.1 The respondent department issued an advertisement dated 13.7.2023 (Annex.2) for the post of Unani Medical Officer. Petitioner also applied vide his application dated 24.7.2023. The respondent no. 4 published a list dated 15.08.2023 (Annex.4) of candidates invited for the document verification of Unani Medical Officer. Petitioner was also invited.

3.2 After the verification of the documents, the respondent no. 4 published a provisional merit list of eligible candidates for Unani Doctors on 11.09.2023 (Annex.6), wherein, petitioner’s name was not mentioned. In the said list, a note was given that if candidates have any objection regarding the provisional list, they may file their objections. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner also filed his written objection on 12.09.2023 (Annex.7), which were not even considered by the respondents and they instead issued a final list dated 22.09.2023 (Annex.8). Hence the writ petition.

4. Defence taken by the respondents in their reply inter-alia is that merit-list is prepared under the provisions of Rule 19 of the Rules of 1973. According to the said Rule 30% weightage/bonus marks are awarded depending on the duration of past experience of similar work under government, NRHM and Chief Minister BPL Jeevan Raksha Kosh.

4.1 Advertisement clearly lays down that minimum age is 20 years and maximum age is 45 years as on 01.01.2024. However, an incumbent who was within age limit as on 31.12.2020 shall be deemed to be within upper age as on 31.12.2024. That apart, a candidate who is continuously working as Unani Doctor in government, Chief Minister BPL Jeevan Raksha Kosh, NRHM shall be entitled to age relaxation by the period equal to the service rendered by him subject to maximum of 5 years. Since petitioner was working under NHM, he was held entitled for age relaxation in consonance with the clause 12 of the advertisement.

5. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties have gone through the case files.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgments rendered in Malik Mazar Sultan Vs. UPSC, 2006 (9) SCC 507 and Ashish Kumar Vs. State of U.P., 2018 (3) SCC 55.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents would urge that similar controversy in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13782/2023 : Dr. Dayaram Saran & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., has been by this Court decided on 27.09.2023 and in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16192/2022 : Dhuleshwar Ghogra Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., decided on 19.05.2023. Therefore, the present writ petition be decided in light of that judgments.

8. The Rules applicable for the recruitment of Unani Medical Officer are Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani, Homoeopathy and Naturopathy Service Rules 1973. Rule 9 prescribes the criteria of age and age relaxation which is as below :-

“Rule 9.

Age:- A candidate for direct recruitment to the post enumerated in the Schedule must have attained the age of 20 years and must not have attained the age of 45 years on the 1st day of January nex

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top