Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Suraj Singh Ranawat vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:18017) on 7 April, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:18017]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21588/2024

Suraj Singh Ranawat S/o Nand Singh, Aged About 33 Years,
Village Netawalkheda, Post Netawalgarh, Pachhli, Tehsil And
District Chittorgarh (Raj.).
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
         Medical      And       Health      Department,            Government     Of
         Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.       The Director, State Health And Family Welfare Institution,
         Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3.       The Additional Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical And
         Health      Services,      Rajasthan,         Tilak       Marg,   Swasthya
         Bhawan, Jaipur.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Vivek Firoda
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Tanuj Jain for
                                  Mr. Mukesh Dave, AGC



               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Order (Oral)

07/04/2025

1. Petitioner herein, inter-alia, seeks an appropriate writ, order

and/or direction to the respondents to consider experience of the

petitioner as Nursing Tutor-cum-Clinical Instructor at par with

Nursing Officer and award him bonus marks in the recruitment

process for appointment on the post of Nursing Officer initiated

vide advertisement dated 05.05.2023 (Annex.5).

2. The brief facts first. Pursuant to the advertisement, as

above, the petitioner, being eligible, applied for the post in

question. As per the advertisement, the candidates were entitled

[2025:RJ-JD:18017] (2 of 8) [CW-21588/2024]

to bonus marks for the experience gained by them while doing

similar nature of work as to the advertised post.

2.1 The petitioner was working on the post of Nursing Tutor-

cum-Clinical Instructor through placement agency at G.N.M.

Training Center, Sri Sanwaliya Ji Government General Hospital,

Chittorgarh. He has been given an experience certificate

02.06.2023 (Annex.6) issued by the Chief Medical Officer, General

Hospital, Chittorgarh and duly verified by the Joint Director,

Medical & Health Services, Zone Udaipur.

2.2 After document verification, the respondents issued

provisional list of selected candidates on 07.10.2023 (Annex.9)

which did not include the name of the petitioner as the

respondents did not award bonus marks to the petitioner against

his experience certificate. Hence, this petition.

3. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the rival contentions

and perused the case file.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits at the outset that

similar nature of controversy in the case of Savita Manmiya Vs.

State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2835/2020)

was decided by a coordinate Bench vide order and judgment dated

16.02.2021 wherein it was directed to grant bonus marks on the

basis of his experience as Nursing Tutor-cum-Clinical Instructor.

The petitioner is also since working on the same post and

performed same nature of work, yet the respondents have not

awarded bonus marks to him.

5. On a Court query posed, learned counsel for the respondents

does not dispute that indeed the facts involved in the present case

[2025:RJ-JD:18017] (3 of 8) [CW-21588/2024]

as well as the controversy raised herein is similar to the one raised

in the case of Savita Manmiya (supra).

6. The observations made by this Court in the case of Savita

Manmiya (supra), being apposite, is reproduced as under:-

"17. Right of claiming bonus marks emanates from Rule 19 of the Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 (hereafter, "Rules of 1965"). Clause No.7 of the advertisement, is somewhat reproduction of Rule 19, which reads as under:-

"7- vuqHko ds vk/kkj ij cksul vad %& jktLFkku fpfdRlk ,oa LokLF; v/khuLFk lsok fu;e 1965 ;Fkk la"kksf/kr fu;eksa ds fu;e 19 esa mYysf[kr izko/kkuksa ds rgr~ vH;fFkZ;ksa dks cksul vad ns; gSA

(I) vH;fFkZ;ksa dh ik=rk dh tkWp ,oa nLrkostksa ds lR;kiu ds le;

vkosnd dks eq[;ea=h chih,y thou j{kkdks'k] ,uvkj,p,e esfMds;j fjyhQ lkslk;Vh] ,M~l dUVªksy lkslk;Vh] jk'Vªh; {k; fu;a=.k dk;ZØe] >kykokM+ vLirky ,oa fpfdRlk egkfo|ky; lkslk;Vh] lesfdr jksx fuxjkuh ifj;kstuk] jkT; LokLF; ifjokj dY;k.k laLFkku (SIHFW) ,oa jkT; ljdkj ds v/khu leku dk;Z djus dk foHkkx ds vf/kd`r izkf/kdkjh }kjk * fu/kkZfjr izk:i esa tkjh vuqHko izek.k i= izLrqr djuk gksxkA ;g vuqHko izek.k i= foKkfir in ds fy;s vkWuykbZu vkosnu djus dh vafre frfFk ls iwoZ dk tkjh fd;k gqvk gksuk vko";d gSA vuqHko vof/k dh x.kuk foKfIr tkjh gksus dh frfFk rd dh tkosxhA vuqHko izek.k i= dk izk:i ^v* layXu gSA foHkkx }kjk fu/kkZfjr izk:i ds vfrfjDr vU; fdlh izk:i esa tkjh fd;k x;k vuqHko izek.k i= ekU; ugha gksxkA *(emphasis supplied)

(ii) jktLFkku ljdkj ds v/khu iz/kkukpk;Z ,oa fu;a=d jktdh;

esfMdy dkWyst] iz/kkukpk;Z >kykokM+ gkWfLiVy ,.M esfMdy dkWyst lkslk;Vh] jktdh; MsUVy dkWyst] funs"kd] tu LokLF;@vkj-lh-,p-@ eksckbZy lftZdy ;wfuV@ vkb-bZ-lh @,M~l] v/kh{kd layXu fpfdRlky; lewg] ifj;kstuk funs"kd] ,u,p,e @,M~l] funs"kd vkjvkjlh] funs"kd SIHFW] jkT; {k; jksx fu;a=.k vf/kdkjh] jkT; ds leLr eq[; fpfdRlk ,oa LokLF; vf/kdkjh] leLr ftyk iztuu ,oa f"k"kq LokLF; vf/kdkjh] eq[; lkoZtfud fo"ys'kd] mi funs"kd vkS'kf/k ijh{k.k iz;ksx"kkyk dks muds v/khu lafonk @O;fDrxr vuqca/k@vLFkkbZ vk/kkj ij dk;Z djus ij vuqHko izek.k i= tkjh djus gsrq vf/kd`r izkf/kdkjh ekuk tkosxkA

(iii) vkWuykbZu vkosnu esa vuqHko ds laca/k esa fu/kkZfjr dkWye esa vko";d izfof'B;ka dh tkuh vko";d gSA ;fn vkWuykbZu vkosnu esa vuqHko ds dkWye esa vko";d izfof'B;k ugha dh xbZ gS] rks ,sls vH;fFkZ;ksa dks vuqHko dk ykHk ugha fn;k tk;sxkA ftlds fy;s vH;FkhZ Lo;a mRrjnk;h gksxkA

[2025:RJ-JD:18017] (4 of 8) [CW-21588/2024]

(iv) vH;FkhZ }kjk izLrqr vuqHko izek.k i= dks foHkkx }kjk tkjhdrkZ vf/kd`r izkf/kdkjh ls lR;kiu djk;s tkus ds i"pkr~ gh cksul vad@vk;q esa f"kfFkyrk dk ykHk fu;ekuqlkj fn;k tkosxk ,oa foHkkx }kjk pkgs tkus ij ewy vuqHko izek.k i= izLrqr fd;k tkuk vfuok;Z gksxkA

(v) vuqHko izek.k i= vkWuykbZu vkosnu ds lkFk viyksM djuk vfuok;Z gS] vU;Fkk vuqHko dk ykHk ns; ugha gksxk ,oa ckn esa vkWQykbZu dksbZ vuqHko izek.k i= Lohdkj ugha fd;k tkosxkA

8- vuqHko izek.k i= dk lR;kiu %&

(i) v/kh{kd layXu fpfdRlky; lewg }kjk tkjh vuqHko izek.k i=ksa dks lacaf/kr iz/kkukpk;Z ,oa fu;a=d] jktdh; esfMdy dkWyst@MsUVy dkWyst }kjk lR;kfir fd;k gqvk gksuk vko";d gSA

(ii) eq[; fpfdRlk ,oa LokLF; vf/kdkjh] izeq[k fpfdRlk vf/kdkjh] ftyk iztuu ,oa f"k"kq LokLF; vf/kdkjh] eq[; lkoZtfud fo"ys'kd] mi funs"kd vkS'kf/k ijh{k.k iz;ksx"kkyk }kjk tkjh vuqHko izek.k i=ksa dks fpfdRlk ,oa LokLF; foHkkx ds lacaf/kr tksu ds la;qDr funs"kd }kjk lR;kfir fd;k gqvk gksuk vko";d gSA "

18. A look at the provision aforesaid clearly shows that it provides for grant of bonus marks to candidates having discharged similar work to a Nurse Gr.II.

19. So far as petitioner's experience under Government Hospital is concerned, that is not in dispute. But, the bone of contention between the rival parties is, as to whether petitioner having worked as Nursing Tutor cum Clinical Instructor can be said to have done similar work of a Nurse Gr.II or in other words, the duties which she has discharged can be said to be similar to the duties and responsibilities which a Nurse Gr.II is required to undertake.

20. For the purpose aforesaid, the guidelines issued by Nursing Council on 04.04.2019 become significant. It will not be out of place to reproduce responsibilities of a Nursing Tutor, which reads thus:-

"Tutor/Senior Nursing Officer:

Eligibility : Msc with 1 year experience or B.Sc/P.B.B.Sc. Nursing with minimum 2 years of experience or Diploma with 6 years experience or Post basic diploma in a speciality with minimum 5 years after GNM clinical experience.

Direct patient care:

● Ensures proper admission and discharge procedures for her patients.

● Assists in the direct care of the patient as an when reuired. ● Implements doctor's instructions concerning patient treatment, investigations and any other procedures. ● Co-ordinates patient care with other departments. ● See that the new admissions are seen by the treating doctors at the earliest.

[2025:RJ-JD:18017] (5 of 8) [CW-21588/2024]

● Ensures entry of above activities electronically as per the institute rules/protocols

Supervision and administration:

● Ensures safe and clean environment for the ward.

      ●      Makes duty and work assignments.
      ●      Maintains good public relations in her ward.
      ●      Handle medico-legal cases in the ward as per the existing
             rules/protocols.

      Educational functions:

      ●      Gives incidental teaching to patients, relatives, staff nurses,
             students and the house keeping staaff.
      ●      Assists the clinical instructor in the evaluation of students.

21. It is noteworthy that in the said guidelines, the Indian Nursing Council has provided that B.Sc. Charge nurses/SNOs can have dual appointment and dual responsibilities. Relevant clause reads thus:-

"BSc charge nurses/SNOs and Bsc staff nurses with required qualification can be offered dual appointment to manage ward/unit as well as teaching students in the clinical area."

22. As against this, job responsibilities of a Staff Nurse have been placed at Annex.R/1. A perusal of Annex.R/1 reveals that even a staff nurse can have responsibilities of teaching also apart from taking routine health care. Upon comparison of the job responsibilities of the Nursing Tutor cum Clinical Instructor vis-a- vis job responsibilities of Nurse Gr.II, this Court finds that a Nursing Tutor discharges or is supposed to discharge most of rather almost all the responsibilities of a Nurse Gr.II.

23. The petitioner has filed a categorical affidavit, inter alia, stating thus:-

"While conducting clinical supervision the petitioner also conducted the direct patient care in the ward/unit of the hospital. During this the petitioner conducted the function of assistance in the direct care of the patient and also implemented the doctors instructions with regard to treatment of the patient and also handle medico legal cases in the ward as per the requirement. It is also submitted that in case of teaching the petitioner teaching to staff nurses and students. It is further submitted that the nurses who are having qualification of B.Sc. can be given dual appointment to teach students decide their clinical duties. In case of petitioner, she is having qualification of B.Sc. Nursing and looking to her ability she was given contractual appointment for conducting dual job while working on the post of Nursing Tutor cum Clinical Instructor. It is further submitted that the work of the petitioner is exactly similar to the work of Staff Nurse and in additional to the work of Staff Nurse petitioner also

[2025:RJ-JD:18017] (6 of 8) [CW-21588/2024]

conducting the job of supervision and teaching. It is also submitted that the post of the Nursing Tutor is also fill up from the Staff Nurse/Nurse Grade-II as per the provisions of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules from the candidates who are having qualification of B.Sc. Nursing."

24. Upon perusal of the averments aforesaid, this Court is of the firm view that petitioner's job responsibilities, though supervisory in nature, cannot be held to be any different than that of a Nurse Gr.II. May be, the petitioner is instructing the trainee nurses, and in that process, invariably, she is supposed to go to the hospital and give instructions and in field training to the under-trainee nurses. That cannot be done without a Nursing Instructor herself carrying out patient care and other clinical services, which a Nurse Gr.II is otherwise required to perform.

25. Case of Nursing Tutor can well be compared with an Assistant Professor in Medical Colleges. An Assistant Professor or a Professor in Medical Colleges, who discharges responsibilities of teaching cannot be said to be teacher alone. As a doctor he teaches in medical colleges and at the same time he discharges duties in the associated hospitals - diagnosing and treating patient while also guiding medical students or resident doctors. So is the case of a Nursing Tutor. She may well give instructions to under-trainee or other nurses, but in such process, she herself may be required to do nursing duties. It may be noted that in professional courses, giving instructions cannot be academic only, unless the Guide/Instructor or Nursing Supervisor himself/herself discharges the professional duties.

26. Upon perusal of the certificates of job responsibilities placed by the petitioner along with the additional affidavit, this Court finds that petitioner has been assigned duties in a Government Hospital. Such being the position, stand of the respondent-State that petitioner was a Nursing Tutor cum Clinical Supervisor and thus, not entitled for bonus marks, is in a way writing off the work she has done, ignoring the fact that the petitioner has discharged similar work or duties, which a Nurse Gr.II is required to discharge.

27. In considered opinion of this Court, Rule 19 of the Rules of 1965, which deals with grant of bonus marks, is ameliorative in nature. If a candidate has worked under a scheme of Government and has performed identical or similar duties, which are required to be performed by the person manning the post which is advertised, the State cannot adopt a telescopic or technical approach to deny grant of bonus marks to such candidate.

28. State cannot gainsay the fact that petitioner has discharged responsibilities of a Nurse Gr.II, may be, to a small extent at least while giving on field training or giving instructions or at least in emergent situation or in absence of a nurse. If that be so, the respondents cannot deny grant of bonus marks to a Nursing Tutor, as the advertisement uses the expression 'Expression of similar work' and not work of Nurse Gr.II per se. In the face of words

[2025:RJ-JD:18017] (7 of 8) [CW-21588/2024]

'similar work', the quantum, percentage or extent of work becomes irrelevant, particularly in the given factual backdrop.

29. That apart, grant of bonus marks is an impetus provided to contractual employees, who have worked under the State Government or under the enumerated schemes of the Government and thus, denying the petitioner bonus marks on a rather technical ground that petitioner's job responsibilities are not that of Nurse Gr.II, is iniquitous.

30. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed. The respondents are directed to grant bonus marks to the petitioner on the basis of her experience as Nursing Tutor cum Clinical Instructor. The respondents are directed to award requisite bonus marks to the petitioner, obviously after verifying the certificates under consideration and accord her appointment, if she is meritorious and otherwise eligible. Needful be done within a period of six weeks from today.

31. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent No.3 on 01.03.2021 along with her original certificate(s) and other relevant documents. The respondent No.3 or his nominee shall verify the same and do the needful, as directed above."

7. Against the aforesaid judgment of the learned Single Judge,

an intra-court appeal, being DBSAW No.63/2022 was preferred,

which was also dismissed along with other connected appeals vide

judgment dated 12.03.2025.

8. In view of the aforesaid view taken by the learned Single

Judge and duly affirmed by the Division Bench, I see no reason

why the benefit of the same be not accorded to the petitioner

herein as well. Accordingly, it is so ordered.

9. Needless to say that fate of the petitioner, in case any

recourse is taken against the Division Bench judgment, shall be

subject to the outcome thereof.

10. Accordingly, petitioner be also given the benefit of the