HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI, JJ.
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Medical And Health Services (Group-Iii), Government Of Rajasthan and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Savita Manmiya, D/o Shri Lal Chand Manmiya – Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 63 of 2022 Connected With D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 211 of 2022, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 523 of 2022, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 554 of 2022, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 721 Of 2022, D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7474 of 2022
Decided On : 12-03-2025
(A) Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 - Rule 19 - Recruitment process for Nurse Grade II - Claim for bonus marks based on experience as Nursing Tutor cum Clinical Instructor - Court upheld the Single Judge's decision granting bonus marks, emphasizing that duties performed were similar to those of Nurse Grade II. (Paras 17, 28, 30)
(B) Employment Law - Bonus Marks - The court ruled that experience under the State Government for similar work qualifies for bonus marks, rejecting the State's technical denial based on job title. (Paras 27, 29)
Facts of the case:
The appeals arise from the State's challenge to a Single Judge's ruling allowing writ petitions for bonus marks in recruitment for Nurse Grade II based on experience as Nursing Tutor.
Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the Single Judge's ruling that the petitioners' experience was similar to Nurse Grade II duties, warranting bonus marks.
Issues: The main issues were whether the experience as Nursing Tutor was similar enough to qualify for bonus marks and the interpretation of Rule 19 regarding bonus marks.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the experience of the petitioners, while discharging duties akin to Nurse Grade II, justified the grant of bonus marks, emphasizing the broad interpretation of similar work under Rule 19.
Result: Appeals dismissed.
Judgment :
1. Since the controversy involved in all the instant special appeals is identical, therefore, the same have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.
2. These special appeals have been preferred claiming the following reliefs:
Appeal No. 63/2022 (By State)
“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Special Appeal may kindly be allowed. The order impugned dated 16.02.2021 passed by Hon’ble Single Judge allowing the writ petition being SBCWP No.2835/2020 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the writ petition filed by the respondent-petitioner may kindly be dismissed.
Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the appellants.”
Appeal No.211/2022 (By State)
“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Special Appeal may kindly be allowed. The order impugned dated 25.03.2021 passed by Hon’ble Single Judge allowing the writ petition being SBCWP No.3871/2021 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the writ petition filed by the respondent-petitioner may kindly be dismissed.
Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the appellants.”
Appeal No.523/2022 (By State)
“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Special Appeal may kindly be allowed. The order impugned dated 09.03.2021 passed by Hon’ble Single Judge allowing the writ petition being SBCWP No.9189/2018 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the writ petition filed by the respondent-petitioner may kindly be dismissed.
Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the appellants.”
Appeal No.554/2022 (By State)
“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Special Appeal may kindly be allowed. The order impugned dated 25.03.2021 passed by Hon’ble Single Judge allowing the writ petition being SBCWP No.3824/2021 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the writ petition filed by the respondent-petitioner may kindly be dismissed.
Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the appellants.”
Appeal No.721/2022 (By State)
“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Special Appeal may kindly be allowed. The order impugned dated 25.03.2021 passed by Hon’ble Single Judge allowing the writ petition being SBCWP No.5024/2021 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the writ petition filed by the respondent-petitioner may kindly be dismissed.
Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the appellants.”
Appeal No.7474/2022 (By applicant in OA)
“It is therefore, very humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to :-
(i) allow the present writ petition;
(ii) Quash and set aside the impugned order dated 08.04.2022 (Ann-2) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal at Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in Original Application No.290/00062/2022.
(iii) Quash and set aside the impugned order dated 8.3.2022 (Ann-A/1) of the Original Application passed by non-applicants.
(iv) Direct the respondents to consider the experience certificate of petitioner and consider the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Senior Nursing Officer (Staff Nurse Grade-I) in pursuant to the advertisement (Annex- A/2) of the Original Application and appointment order be passed in favor of petitioner;
(v) Quash and set aside any adverse order passed against the petitioner in pursuant to the rejection of petitioner’s candidature, if any;
(vi) grant such relief/reliefs which in the facts and circumstances of this case may do complete justice to the petitioner; and
(vii) award cost o
Experience as Nursing Tutor cum Clinical Instructor qualifies for bonus marks under Rule 19 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965, as duties performed are similar to tho....
The court established that experience as a Nursing Tutor-cum-Clinical Instructor qualifies for bonus marks in recruitment, as duties performed are similar to those of a Nurse Gr.II.
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.
Experience relevant to job duties qualifies for bonus marks; distinctions in job designations do not detract from similarity in functional responsibilities.
Courts would be slow in interfering in policy matters unless policy is found to be palpably discriminatory and arbitrary.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.