Deepu Kumari Gochar vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 4086 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2683/2022

Deepu Kumari Gochar D/o Shri Prahladh, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Kishorepura, Tehsil Digod, District Kota.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Ayurved, Yoga And Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha And Homoeopathy (Ayush) Department, Through Its Secretary, Ayush Bhawan, Sector 26, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.).

2. State Of Rajasthan, Department Of Personnel, Through Its Secretary, Secretariate, Jaipur.

3. Director, Ayurveda And Indian Medicine Department, Directorate Of Ayurveda, Ashok Marg, Mali Mohalla, Ajmer.

4. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurveda University, Through Its Registrar, Karvad, Nagaur Road, Jodhpur.

5. Principal, Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurveda University, Karvad, Nagaur Road, Jodhpur.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :    Mr. Manoj Bohra.
For Respondent(s)          :    Mr. A.K. Gaur, AAG
                                Mr. Suniel Purohit.



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

                                    Order

15/03/2022

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved

by non-inclusion of her name in the provisional merit list issued by

the respondents for the post of Compounder / Nurse Junior Grade

pursuant to the advertisement dated 17.6.2021 in the category of

MBC(NCL).

(2 of 3) [CW-2683/2022]

Submissions have been made that though the petitioner had

applied for issuance of the certificate before the cut-off date i.e.

23.7.2021, the certificate was issued on 8.8.2021 and the

respondents on account of the fact that certificate was issued after

the last date of application, have not taken the same into

consideration.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue

raised in the present petition is squarely covered by judgment in

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

Petition No.2272/2022, decided on 24.2.2022, wherein, in similar

circumstances the respondents were directed to take into

consideration the certificate.

Learned counsel for the respondents reiterated the fact that

the certificate issued to the petitioner is after the cut-off date and

in terms of Clause 9.2 of the advertisement, the petitioner is not

entitled to any relief.

A perusal of the document (Annex.7) produced by the

petitioner by way of additional affidavit indicates that the

petitioner in fact had applied for issuance of certificate on

23.7.2021, which certificate was issued to her on 8.8.2021.

This Court in the case of Sudarhana Dadhich (supra) came to

the following conclusion:-

"I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

As noticed herein-before, the certificate of EWS is issued based on the income of the previous financial year and the certificate is valid for the year subsequent. In the present case, based on the financial year 2020-21, the petitioner has been

(3 of 3) [CW-2683/2022]

granted certificate for 2021-22. The period for 2021- 22 essentially would start from 01.04.2021 till 31.03.2022 and as the certificate, can only be issued based on the previous year's income, the petitioner was required to apply for a certificate, which was done by her before the last date of application, however, the same was issued after the last date of application i.e. 23.07.2021, on 04.08.2021.

From the certificate produced by the petitioner, apparently she is entitled for benefit as EWS and only on account of the fact that certificate was issued with delay to the petitioner, excluding her from the benefit of her status as EWS, does not appear to be justified when she is entitled based on the certificate to take benefit from 01.04.2021 to 31.03.2022.

Consequently, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The respondents are directed to take into consideration the certificate of the petitioner for the purpose of grant of benefit as EWS and in case, she is otherwise eligible, include her name in the provisional merit list."

The issue raised in the present petition is covered by the

determination and directions given in the case of Sudarhana

Dadhich (supra).

Consequently, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is

allowed. The respondents are directed to take into consideration

the certificate dated 8.8.2021 of the petitioner for the purpose of

grant of benefit as MBC(NCL) and in case, she is found otherwise

eligible, include her name in the provisional merit list.

(ARUN BHANSALI),J 107-Sumit/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)