Pooja Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 8614 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4435/2022

Pooja Sharma D/o Ram Kishan Sharma W/o Amit Kumar, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vpo Noowan, Ratangarh, Churu.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Medical And Health Services, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 302005.

2. Director (Non Gazetted), Medical And Health Services, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.) 302005.

3. Additional Director (Gezetted), Medical And Health Services, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.) 302005.

4. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Churu (Raj.).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.K. Verma. For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.S. Rajpurohit, AAG with Mr. Lucky Rajpurohit.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

Order

04/07/2022

Learned counsel for the parties submit that the issue raised

in the present writ petition is similar to that of Jagdish Prasad Nai

v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.1507/2022 & other connected matters, decided on 26.5.2022

and, therefore, the present writ petition may also be decided in

light of and with similar directions as given in the said case.

In the case of Jagdish Prasad Nai (supra), it was inter alia

observed and directed by this Court as under:-

(2 of 3) [CW-4435/2022]

"These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners aggrieved against the action of the respondents in counting the period of experience of the petitioners, which has resulted in either their becoming disqualified for applying to the post of Laboratory Assistant pursuant to the advertisement dated 29.5.2018 and/or to get less bonus marks than what they are actually entitled to.

Submissions have been made that though the petitioners have worked for the entire month, as the emoluments paid to the petitioners have been calculated based on 26 days emoluments, the respondents while calculating the period of experience, have not treated them to have worked for the entire month, which action of the respondents is contrary to the factual position as well as the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act, wherein, the minimum wages are required to be calculated in terms of the notifications issued, which provide that the daily wages are required to be calculated by dividing the monthly wages by 26 days and that in the rates fixed, weekly holidays are included in salary, therefore, the respondents could not have deducted the period based on the fact of payment of wages for particular number of days.

Further reliance has been placed on judgment in Mahipal Lakhera v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2577/2020, decided on 11.1.2021.

Learned counsel for the respondents made submissions that wherever the petitioners have objections pertaining to the calculation made by the respondents pertaining to their period of experience, they may make representations to the respondents and the same shall be appropriately decided by the respondents.

In view of the above submissions made, the petitioners may make representation to the Director (Non-Gazetted) with regard to the calculation of their experience and consequential fact about their eligibility / award of bonus marks within a period of 15 days from today.

                                                                               (3 of 3)                        [CW-4435/2022]

                                                     The     Director      (Non-Gazetted)             would     pass

appropriate orders on the representations to be made by the petitioners within a period of four weeks thereafter.

The petitioners would be free to take appropriate proceedings, in case, they have any grievance qua the decision taken by the authority in this regard.

The respondents shall not conclude the recruitment before passing of the final orders as indicated hereinbefore.

It is expected of the respondents to conclude the entire exercise by 31st of July, 2022."

In view of the submissions made, the petition filed by the

petitioner is disposed of in light of and with similar directions as

given in the case of Jagdish Prasad Nai (supra).

(ARUN BHANSALI),J 14-PKS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)