Vinita Kumari vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 4552 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4012/2022 Vinita Kumari D/o Shri Shish Ram, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village And Post Sari, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Ayurved And Indian Medicine Department, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Director, Department Of Ayurved, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

3. Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Through Its Registrar, Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Karwar, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

4. The Registrar, Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Karwar, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Dr. Nupur Bhati.
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. A.K. Gaur, AAG.
                                 Mr. Suniel Purohit.


        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
                       Order
23/03/2022

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved

against the non-inclusion of name of the petitioner in the

provisional merit list for recruitment to the post of

Compounder/Nurse Junior Grade.

It is inter-alia indicated in the petition that petitioner applied

in the category of OBC (NCL), she was called for document

verification, wherein, the petitioner produced certificate dated

18.10.2021 (Annex.7). In the provisional merit list prepared by

the respondents, though the petitioner has obtained marks higher

than the cut-off, her name has not appeared in the list. The

petitioner filed objection as provided by the respondents on

08.02.2022, however, as the name of the petitioner has not been

included, the present petition has been filed.

(2 of 3) [CW-4012/2022]

Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that the

issue raised in the present petition is covered by judgment in

Kailash Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ

Petition No.2505/2022, wherein, this Court has come to the

conclusion that in case, a candidate produces a certificate of prior

year alongwith an affidavit in terms of notification dated

09.09.2015, the candidate would be entitled to be included in the

category of OBC (NCL).

In the present case also, the petitioner has produced prior

certificate dated 08.01.2020 (Annex.2) alongwith an affidavit filed

as Annex.11 with the respondents and, therefore, the petitioner is

entitled to be included in the category of OBC (NCL) and as she

has obtained marks higher than the cut-off for the said category,

her name may be directed to be included in the final merit list.

Learned counsel appearing for the recruiting agency -

respondents No. 3 & 4 made submissions that the petitioner has

produced only one certificate dated 18.10.2021 (Annex.7), which

in view of provisions of Clause 9.2 of the advertisement, as the

same was issued after the cut-off date, could not be taken into

consideration.

Further submissions have been made that neither the

certificate dated 08.01.2020 (Annex.2) nor the affidavit

(Annex.11) has been produced by the petitioner alongwith the

objections as claimed and, therefore, in terms of circular dated

09.09.2015 also, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

Submissions have also been made that only with a view to

take advantage of judgment in the case of Kailash Kumar (supra),

the affidavit (Annex.11) has been prepared in the back date and,

(3 of 3) [CW-4012/2022]

therefore, the same cannot be taken into consideration for any

purpose.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel

for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

The entire basis for seeking the relief in the petition is the

certificate dated 08.01.2020 (Annex.2) alongwith affidavit

(Annex.11).

The respondents No.3 & 4 - Recruiting Agency has

specifically denied the petitioner having produced the said

documents on 08.02.2022 or prior thereto.

The said submission made gains credence based on the

representation made by the petitioner on 08.02.2022 (Annex.10),

wherein, there is no reference of the said document. The only

submission made is that as the petitioner has higher marks than

the cut-off, she is entitled to be included in the provisional merit

list.

In the case of Kailash Kumar (supra), the Court only on

account of the fact that in terms of guidelines dated 09.09.2015

(Annex.12) provisions were made that based on an affidavit, a

prior certificate could be used for three years, the relief was

granted to the petitioner therein.

As the requirements of guidelines dated 09.09.2015

(Annex.12) are not fulfilled in the present case, as the affidavit

Annex.11 has not even being produced to the respondents and the

same for the reasons indicated hereinbefore appears to be a back

dated document, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

The petition is, therefore, dismissed.

(ARUN BHANSALI),J 111-pradeep/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)