Santosh Swami vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 3538 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 33/2021

Santosh Swami D/o Sita Ram, Aged About 33 Years, W/o Shri Nemi Chand Swami, Resident Of Village Loha, Tehsil Ratangarh, District Churu.

----Appellant Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Additional Director (Admn.), Department Of Medical And Heatlh, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

                                                                  ----Respondents


  For Appellant(s)         :     Mr. Lokesh Mathur
  For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG
                                 Mr. Mahesh Thanvi
                                 Mr. Kunal Upadhyay

HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS Judgment / Order

08/03/2022

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the reason

for upholding the results of the appellant in the matter of appointment

pursuant to advertisement dated 18.06.2018 is on account of dispute

with regard to recognition of qualification of Adeeb-Mahir. He would

submit that in relation to earlier advertisement of the year 2000,

involving identical issue of recognition of Adeeb-Mahir qualification, this

Court vide order dated 12.01.2022 passed in D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No.

534/2005 has held that all such qualifications issued prior to recall in

the year 2011, have to be recognized.

Therefore, it is contended that the issue raised by the appellant is

squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment.

Counsel for the State would submit that the order passed in SAW

No. 534/2005 was related to only those cases where the result was

(2 of 2) [SAW-33/2021]

withheld in the matter of selection/appointment pursuant to

advertisement of 2000, while in the present case, withholding of result

was pursuant to advertisement of 2018. He would further submit that in

the aforesaid decision, relief has been granted by this Court directing

the State authorities to consider case of the appellants therein for

appointment for the post in question according to merit position. He

would submit that though on legal issue this case is also convered, but

appointments would be subject to availability of posts.

We find that the issue raised in this appeal is squarely covered by

order dated 12.01.2022 passed in D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 534/2005

and as in the present case, admittedly, the qualification was obtained

prior to withdrawal of recognition in the year 2011, the appellant, in this

case, would also be entitled to similar relief as has been granted in the

other case.

It goes without saying that the direction, which has been given in

other case is also to be given in this case, would be subject to

availability of the posts.

Accordingly this appeal is also disposed off with a direction to the

State authorities to consider the appellant for appointment for the post

in question according to merit position and if appointed, to grant all

consequential benefits except back wages for the past period. In other

words, the appellant would have the benefit of seniority for the past

period from the date the person below the petitioner in merit list was

appointed.

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACJ

58-nidhi/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)