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

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN - PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JODHP
VIPIN KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
SAW 771 2023



[2023:RJ-JD:32045-DB]

(1 of 8)

[SAW-771/2023]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 771/2023

Vipin Kumar S/o Sh. Krishan Lal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o

Bolawali, Tehsil Sangariya, District Hanumangarh (Raj.).

----Appellant

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,

Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan,

Secretariat, Jaipur.

2.

The Director (Non-Gazetted), Directorate Of Medical And

Health Services, Rajasthan Jaipur.

3.

The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Hanumangarh,

District Hanumangarh.

----Respondents

For Appellant(s)

:

Mr. H.S. Sidhu

For Respondent(s)

:

----

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Judgment

27/09/2023

(Oral)

1.

The present appeal has been filed against the order dated

27.07.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ

Petition No.13986/2021, whereby the writ petition preferred by

the appellant-petitioner was dismissed.

2.

Briefly, the facts noted for deciding the present appeal are

that the appellant vied for the post of Nurse Grade-II notified for

Non-TSP area pursuant to advertisement dated 30.05.2018. The

appellant claimed bonus marks on the basis of experience he had

[2023:RJ-JD:32045-DB]

(2 of 8)

[SAW-771/2023]

gained during his stint as a Nurse under NRHM scheme in the

State of Punjab.

3.

In pursuance of an interim order in appellant’s earlier writ

petition (being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12678/2018), an

experience certificate dated 29.06.2018 indicating experience of

three years eight months and ten days was issued to the appellant

by the respondent No.3.

4.

On the basis of experience certificate so issued, the appellant

applied for the post and was selected, whereafter an appointment

order dated 28.04.2020 came to be issued in his favour.

5.

A few days after the appellant had joined, his appointment

was cancelled by order dated 19.05.2020 passed by Additional

Director, Medical and Health Services, Jaipur for the reason that

the appellant has gained experience in a State other than the

State of Rajasthan.

6.

Aggrieved by the order dated 19.05.2020, the appellant

preferred a writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.4660/2020, wherein by an order dated 18.08.2021, the order

dated 19.05.2020 passed by the respondents was quashed and

the respondents were directed to issue 15 days’ notice to the

appellant and pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law.

7.

In furtherance of the order dated 18.08.2021, the Director-

respondent No.2 issued a notice to the appellant on 19.08.2021

making a reference of the order dated 18.08.2021 passed in

appellant’s writ petition, to which the appellant furnished a

reply/representation on 02.09.2021.

8.

The appellant’s appointment yet again came to be cancelled

by impugned order dated 09.09.2021, indicating therein that in

[2023:RJ-JD:32045-DB]

(3 of 8)

[SAW-771/2023]

writ petitions involving similar issues, the Court has refused to

grant benefit of bonus marks on the basis of experience gained

while working under schemes in States other than the State of

Rajasthan. And that if such bonus marks are excluded, the

appellant’s marks fall short of the cut-off for his category.

9.

On 06.10.2021, an interim order was passed by this Court

staying the operation of order dated 09.09.2021, while observing

that the appellant’s case is dependent upon final outcome of his

writ petition (being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12678/2018).

10.

Aggrieved of the order dated 09.09.2021, the appellant

preferred another writ petition (being S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.13986/2021) which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge

vide order dated 27.07.2023. Hence, the present appeal has been

filed.

11.

Heard.

12.

Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submits that

the appellant was entitled for the bonus marks as per the proviso

to Rule 19 o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top