Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mahipal Lakhera vs State Of Rajasthan on 11 January, 2021
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2577/2020
Mahipal Lakhera S/o Shri Siddharaj Lakhera, Aged About 30
Years, R/o Near Old Bus Stand, Jawal, Tehsil And District Sirohi,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Health And Family Welfare Society, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Director, Medical And Health Department, Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
3. Additional Director (Administration), Medical And Health
Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
4. Project Director, National Health Mission, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. MS Deora
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta for
Mr. KS Rajpurohit
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Judgment
11/01/2021
1. The petitioner vied for the post of Nurse Grade II pursuant to
advertisement dated 30.05.2018.
2. The petitioner has an experience of working as a Nurse
Grade II on a Mobile Medical Van with a trust called 'Shri
Parmatama Chand Bhandari Charitable Trust, Jodhpur' on contract
basis for a period of 3 years, 1 month and 27 days.
3. While submitting his application form, the petitioner claimed
30 bonus marks for such experience.
4. The petitioner did not find his name in the provisional select
list and final select list and on enquiry, he was informed that he
has been awarded 20 bonus marks in place of 30.
(2 of 3) [CW-2577/2020]
5. It is the case of the petitioner that if he is/was awarded 30
marks, he would fall in the merit list of his category, cut off
whereof is 72.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner
had worked for more than 3 years and produced a certificate duly
issued by competent authority, thus, respondents were not
justified in reducing petitioner's bonus marks to 20.
7. Mr. Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-
State argued that petitioner had produced a certificate of having
worked in Mobile Medical Van for 3 years and 1 month, but the
duty chart for persons deployed in Mobile Van including petitioner,
shows that they are required to work only for 20 days in a month.
He argued that this being the position, petitioner's experience is
liable to be calculated on the basis of actual number of working
days, which were 20 in each month. Accordingly, petitioner has
experience of 2 years and 1 month and thus, entitled for only 20
bonus marks, submitted Mr. Mehta.
8. Heard.
9. It is undisputed that the experience certificate duly verified
by the competent authority shows that petitioner possesses
experience of 3 years, 1 month and 27 days. It is to be noted that
petitioner's employer had made payment on monthly basis and his
experience certificate has also been issued on such basis.
10. In considered opinion of this Court, once the salary is being
paid on monthly basis, the petitioner and/or any other employee is
required to be treated to have worked for all 30 days in a month,
barring exceptional cases.
11. Looking to the nature of job responsibilities, if a person is
required to work on lesser number of days in a month, it would be
(3 of 3) [CW-2577/2020]
injustice and disrespect to his hard work or peculiarity of job on
account of which he is given duties only for 20 days, despite
payment being made for 30 days.
12. It can well be understood that since the petitioner's duty was
to be attached with Mobile Medical Van, he was required to work
only for 20 days, obviously looking to the onerous nature of the
duties.
13. In response to Court's query, Mr. Mehta admitted that even if
a person does not work on Sundays or National Holidays, such
days are required to be considered in his experience. If a person
despite being assigned duties for 20 days in a month, has been
paid salary for the whole month, why would his experience be not
of 30 days, particularly when he did not remain absent?
14. The respondents' action of calculating experience on the
basis of duty chart or number of days the petitioner was required
to work, is therefore, per-se arbitrary.
15. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed. Petitioner is held
entitled for 30 bonus marks.
16. The respondents are directed to award 30 bonus marks to
the petitioner and accord him appointment, if he falls in merit and
is otherwise eligible.
17. Needful be done within a period of six weeks from today.
18. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
16-CPGoyal/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
