Back
IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
REKHA BORANA
Shaitan Ram S/o Shri Mota Ram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. cancelled appointment order (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. right to bonus marks debated (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. apex court's influence on classification (Para 8 , 10) |
| 4. petitioner's contention on entitlement (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. previous judgments relevant for bonus marks (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. amendment impacts on rule 19 (Para 17 , 18) |
| 7. challenge to findings post-appeal (Para 20 , 21) |
| 8. reasonable classification upheld (Para 22 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 9. petitioner bound by prior reliefs (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 10. court decision on petition dismissal (Para 33 , 34 , 36) |
ORDER :
REKHA BORANA, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed aggrieved of order dated 09.06.2025 (Annexure-12) whereby the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Compounder/Nurse Junior Grade stood cancelled.
2. The facts are that the petitioner having work experience as Compounder/Nurse with Dr. Sarvepali Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur (respondent No.5) through placement agency, participated in the recruitment process initiated in pursuance to advertisement dated 07.06.2013.
3. As per condition No.7 of the said advertisement, bonus marks were to be granted to the candidates having work experience
A litigant cannot claim distinction from a judicial decision relied upon for relief; subsequent judgments affecting the basis of entitlement invalidate previous claims.
The court established that the nature of work must be similar for bonus marks eligibility, and distinct departmental rules govern the recruitment processes.
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.
Courts would be slow in interfering in policy matters unless policy is found to be palpably discriminatory and arbitrary.
The experience certificate for services rendered outside the state cannot be considered for appointment and awarding bonus marks in a different state.
Candidates with higher merit cannot be discriminated against on procedural grounds, emphasizing that merit should dictate appointments as per Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
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
