Manisha vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9866 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:39778]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18108/2023

1. Manisha W/o Sandeep Kumar, Aged About 31 Years, R/o-

Mundi Taal, V.p.o- Mundi Taal, District-Churu, Raj.

2. Usha Kumari Mahala D/o Brijlal Mahala, Aged About 33 Years, R/o-C/o Mohar Singh, Near Nehara Ki Dhani, Kolsiya, District-Jhunjhunu, Raj.

3. Sarika Kumari W/o Rajesh Kumar, Aged About 30 Years, R/o-Village-Chimanpura, Bhuari, District-Churu, Raj.

----Petitioners Versus

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

2. Additional Director (Administration), Medical And Health Services, Tilak Marg, Jaipur, Raj.

3. Project Director, National Health Mission, Secretariat Nhm, Swasthay Bhawan, C-Scheme, Tilak Marg Jaipur, Raj.

4. Mission Director, National Health Mission, Secretariat Nhm, Swasthay Bhawan, C-Scheme, Tilak Marg Jaipur, Raj.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Jhajharia.

For Respondent(s)            :     --



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

                                        Order

20/11/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

respondents are bound to abide by judgment passed by Jaipur

Bench of this Hon'ble court in Priyanka Saini & Ors. V/s State

of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.1766/2017),

[2023:RJ-JD:39778] (2 of 3) [CW-18108/2023]

decided on 01.05.2017, the operative portion of this judgment,

reads as under:-

"following the view formulated by the coordinate Bench in the case

of Rajkumar & Ors. (supra), the present writ petition are disposed

of by issuing following directions:-

"(i) That the respondents shall issue a public notice in "Rajasthan Patrika' and 'Dainik Bhaskar' having largest circulation in the State of Rajasthan, within ten days from the receipt of certified copy of the order.

(ii) That the respondents in the public notice shall also disclose number of vacancies available in each district.

(iii) That the respondents in the public notice to be issued in pursuance of directions issued above, shall seek option of candidates district- wise. Needless to say, a meritorious candidate shall first give option for his/ her home district and then shall give his/ her preference for remaining districts serial-wise.

(iv) That the respondents, after meritorious candidates are allowed to exercise option for his/her home district and posts are filled on that basis, shall allocate remaining posts in other districts to successful candidates on the basis of merit.

(v) It is clarified that no candidate lower in merit will be allowed to jump a candidate who is meritorious. So far employment is concerned, all candidates in merit list shall be allocated a district.

(vi) That respondents shall device a formula to act in consonance with the directions issued by this court above so that no meritorious person is left out of the employment".

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

petitioners may be permitted to file a representation before the

respondents in the light of judgment rendered by this court in the

case of Poonam (supra) for redressal of the grievance of the

petitioners.

3. In view of above, the present writ petition is disposed of in

terms that in the event of filing a representation by the

[2023:RJ-JD:39778] (3 of 3) [CW-18108/2023]

petitioners, the same shall be considered by the respondents at

the earliest preferably within a period of eight weeks from the

date of receipt of certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance

with law.

4. The order has been passed based on the submissions made in

the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the

veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case,

the averments made therein are found to be correct, the

petitioners would be entitled to the relief.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 59-Prashant/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)