Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Vandana Purohit vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:41030) on 29 November, 2023
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2023:RJ-JD:41030]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3141/2020
Vandana Purohit D/o Shri Mohan Lal Purohit W/o Shri Nitin
Paliwal, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Near Acharya Printing
Press, Hastinapur, Kankroli District Rajsamand
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And
Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. The Director, Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
3. The Additional Director (Administration), Medical And
Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
4. The Joint Director, Medical And Health Services, Zone
Ajmer.
5. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Rajsamand
6. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Jaipur
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinay Jain.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.S. Rajpurohit, AAG with
Mr. Shreyansh Mehta &
Mr. Lucky Rajpurohit.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
29/11/2023
1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this
writ petition may kindly be allowed with costs and by
issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction, the merit list
of Nurse Grade II (GNM) dated 08.01.2020 (Annexure
No.5) may kindly be declared illegal to the extent of
[2023:RJ-JD:41030] (2 of 4) [CW-3141/2020]
including the name of the petitioner in the non-selected
list, the respondents may kindly be directed to include the
name of the petitioner in merit list dated 08.01.2020 as per
their merit and respondents may kindly be directed to give
appointment to the petitioner on the post of Nurse Grade II
(GNM) alongwith their eligible candidates as stated in the
merit list dated 08.01.2020.
Any other order favorable to the petitioner may also
be passed."
2. Brief facts of the case, as noticed by this Court, are that the
petitioner, who possesses the requisite qualification of Sr.
Secondary and General Nursing and Midwifery Course, is
registered with Rajasthan Nursing Council. The petitioner was
applied through the placement agency and remained in service
from 01.07.2017 to 30.12.2017, and meanwhile, also completed
her Bridge Course Certificate for Community Health for nurses
from 01.07.2017 to 30.12.2017. The petitioner participated in the
recruitment process in pursuance of the advertisement dated
27.05.2019 as a General Female candidate for the post of Nurse
Grade-II, but the grievances of the petitioner is that she has not
been selected despite falling in the merit.
3. Mr. Vinay Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the duration of the course of Bridge
Programme on Certificate in Community Health from 01.07.2017
to 30.12.2017 ought to be taken as an experience as well.
4. Mr. Karan Singh Rajpurohit, AAG assisted by Mr. Shreyansh
Mehta & Mr. Lucky Rajpurohit, appearing on behalf of the
respondents, has shown this Court the judgment dated
03.09.2020 rendered by this Hon'ble Court in Kirti Kumar
[2023:RJ-JD:41030] (3 of 4) [CW-3141/2020]
Patidar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.1596/2020, whereby this Hon'ble Court has held
that the respondents were justified in confining the experience
certificate to the extent of actual days worked or on the basis of
payment made to the employees. It was further held that a
candidate can claim bonus marks only for the period of actual
working days or the payment made to him.
4.1 Thus, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the
period of undergoing the Bridge Programme for Certificate in
Community Health for nurses cannot be combined with the
experience certificate.
4.2 Learned Additional Advocate General also submits that the
petitioner, in her own category, has attained 56.784 marks in the
category of Female General whereas the cut-off marks for the
recruitment for the same category is 58.192 marks, and thus, the
petitioner does not fall in merit for the experience already given.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties as well as
perusing the record of the case alongwith the precedent law cited
at Bar, this Court finds that the petitioner, who is participating in
the selection process for the post of Nurse Grade-II in pursuance
of the advertisement dated 27.05.2019, qualifies for 10 bonus
marks as her actual experience is 01 year 07 months and 27 days
and the duration for which, she has completed the Bridge
Programme on Certificate in Community Health for nurses, cannot
be added to her experience, and thus, the respondents have
rightly added 10 bonus marks to the petitioner tally of the marks.
Furthermore, the cut-off marks for the Female unreserved
[2023:RJ-JD:41030] (4 of 4) [CW-3141/2020]
category is admittedly 58.192 marks whereas the petitioner has
only secured 56.784 marks, and thus, she does not fall in the
merit.
6. In view of the above, no interference in the present writ
petition is called for and the same is accordingly dismissed. All
pending applications stand disposed of.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
61-Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
