Ravi Parkash Samriya vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Others
2012 Latest Caselaw 3718 Del

       *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                      Judgment delivered on 01.06.2012
+      W.P.(C) 3536/2012 & CM No. 7453-54/2012


RAVI PARKASH SAMRIYA                                     ...       Petitioner
                                     Versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & OTHERS                           ...       Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner                : Mr Susheel Sharma,
For the Respondents               : Ms Zubeda Begum


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN
                     JUDGMENT

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 07.12.2011 passed in O.A. No.

2525/2010 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi

whereby the petitioner's said original application has been dismissed. The

petitioner had sought a direction to be given to the respondents to process his case

for appointment as Auxiliary Nurse (Mid Wife) (hereinafter referred to as

"ANM").

2. An advertisement No. 4/2007 had been issued inviting applications, inter

alia, for the said post of ANM.

"AUXILIARY NURSE/MIDWIFE, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI POST CODE- 072/07 NUMBER OF VACANCIES - 100 (UR-50, OBC-27, SC-15, ST-08) Essential Qualifications: (i) Matric pass from a recognized University/Board/ School or equivalent.

(ii) Qualified Midwife registered with Nursing Council of India as Aux. Nurse/Midwife.

Desirable - (i) Professional experience in Government or Semi Government Hospitals, Nursing Home or Welfare Centre.

(ii) Working knowledge of Hindi.

Pay Scale: `.4000-6000/- Group C Period of Probation : 2 years Age limit: Between 18 and 27 years (Relaxable for SC/ST-05 years, OBC-03 years)."

3. As per the list of dates submitted by the petitioner before the Tribunal, he

was an SC candidate and had applied for the post of ANM. The respondent No.2

inadvertently issued an Admit Card bearing Roll Number 07110612 to the

applicant for appearing in the examination for selection of A Grade Staff Nurses.

The petitioner pointed out the mistake to the respondent No.2 and stated that he had

not applied for A Grade Staff Nurse and the roll number for the examination of A

Grade Staff Nurse was wrongly issued to him. Thereafter, the respondent, after

checking and scrutinizing the petitioner's certificates issued him a another admit

card bearing roll number 07210950 for appearing in the examination for Auxiliary

Nurse/ Mid Wife (ANM). It was further stated by the petitioner himself that,

accordingly, he appeared in the preliminary examination conducted by the

respondent No.2. From the aforesaid narration of facts, which has been given by

the petitioner himself, it is apparent that in the first instance the petitioner had

applied for the post of ANM. However, by mistake the admit card was given to

him in respect of the post of A Grade Staff Nurse. He pointed out this mistake to

the respondent who corrected the same and gave him another admit card in respect

of the post of ANM. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared in the preliminary

examination conducted by the respondent.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner had contended before us that he had

actually applied for the post of "Assistant Nurse" and not for the post of ANM.

This submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is not borne out by the

facts. It is for this reason that we have referred to the list of dates given by the

petitioner himself before the Tribunal wherein he has clearly stated that he had

applied for the post of ANM.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent stated that, in any event, the post of

Assistant Nurse was not advertised and the post advertised was of Auxiliary Nurse

/Mid Wife (ANM). This is also confirmed by the information given in the Right to

Information Act, 2005 which finds mention at page 52 of the paper book. This

being the position, the only thing that we have to see is whether the petitioner had

the necessary qualifications for the post of ANM as per the recruitment rules for

the post of ANM. The essential qualification, as per the rules, are as under:-

"Essential:

(i) Matric pass from a recognized University/Board, School or equivalent.

(ii) Qualified Midwife registered with Nursing Council of India as Auxiliary Nurse/Midwife.

Desirable:-

(i) Professional experience in Government or Semi-Government Hospitals, Nursing Home or Welfare Centre.

       (ii)      Working knowledge of Hindi"
                                                          (emphasis supplied)

It is apparent that one of the essential requirements is that the applicant must be a

qualified Midwife registered with the Nursing Council of India as Auxiliary

Nurse/Midwife. Admittedly, the petitioner is not a qualified Midwife registered

with Nursing Council of India. Consequently, he does not have the essential

qualification for the post of ANM. The Tribunal has rightly rejected the original

application filed by the petitioner. The writ petition has no merits and the same is

dismissed. There shall be no orders as to costs.

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

V.K.JAIN, J June 01, 2012 kb