Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sonu Verma vs State Of Rajasthan on 26 July, 2021
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8356/2021
Sonu Verma D/o Shri Shambhu Lal Verma, Aged About 26 Years,
R/o 262 K Jay Nagar Road, Ward No. 1, Begun, District
Chittorgarh (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And
Health (Group-2) Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Chittorgarh.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vandana Bhansali
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Judgment
26/07/2021
(1) By way of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged
non-inclusion of her name in the list of eligible candidates called
for document verification published on 21.6.2021 alongwith
communication of even date.
(2) The petitioner had submitted her application form pursuant
to recruitment advertisement dated 23.5.2021 issued for engaging
Covid Health Assistant for District Chittorgarh on contract basis.
According to the petitioner, she had submitted her application
form well in time i.e. on 28.5.2021, but despite being meritorious
and eligible, her name was not shown in the list of candidates
called for document verification.
(2 of 3) [CW-8356/2021]
(3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the
meantime a corrigendum/amended notification was issued on
28.5.2021, whereby the candidates were asked to fill fresh
application form, but since it was not given wide publicity, the
petitioner could not submit a fresh application form.
(4) It was argued by learned counsel that information sought in
the application form pursuant to earlier notification dated
23.5.2021 and the subsequent notification dated 28.5.2021 were
identical and the petitioner's candidature thus, ought to have been
considered in furtherance of earlier recruitment notification.
(5) Ms. Vandana Bhansali, learned counsel for the respondents
argued that the amended notification/corrigendum dated
28.5.2021 was published in daily newspaper so also on official
website of the CM&HO, Chittorgarh, hence, it is wrong to contend
that it was not given due publicity.
(6) Learned counsel argued that in terms of the note appended
with the corrigendum dated 28.5.2021, all desirous candidates
were required to fill fresh application forms. She argued that the
petitioner herself is to be blamed for not being vigilant
(7) On Court's query, it was informed by Ms. Bhansali that the
fresh application forms were required to be filled-in because seats
were not appropriately reserved while issuing earlier notification
dated 23.5.2021.
(8) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of
the view that the respondents have committed no illegality in
requiring the candidates to fill fresh application forms vide
corrigendum dated 28.5.2021. If the number of seats have
increased/decreased due to wrong reservation, the only way out
was to invite fresh applications. The petitioner having failed to fill-
(3 of 3) [CW-8356/2021]
in application form afresh, cannot claim any right of being
considered.
(9) The respondents were justified in ignoring all the application
forms submitted pursuant to earlier advertisement dated
23.5.2021.
(10) The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed.
(11) The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
56-CPGoyal/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
