Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kailash Kaswan vs Sh. Mukul Sharma (2025:Rj-Jd:11479) on 27 February, 2025
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2025:RJ-JD:11479]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Writ Contempt Petition No. 45/2025
Kailash Kaswan S/o Shri Ramchandra, Aged About 31 Years,
(Physically Handicapped Candidate-Ol), Resident Of Village /post
Paliyas, Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur , Presently Posted As
Nurse Grade -2Nd /gnm, Chc Luni, District Jodhpur (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Sh. Mukul Sharma, Then Additional Director
(Administration), Department Of Medical And Health
Services, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur, Presently Holding The
Post Of District Collector, Sikar.
2. Shri Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Director (Non-Gazetted),
Medical And Health Services, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.
3. Smt. Gayatri A. Rathore, Principal Secretary To The State
Govt., Medical , Health And Family Welfare, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
4. Dr. Surendra Singh Shekhawat, Chief Medical And Health
Officer , Jodhpur.
5. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary
To The Govt., Medical And Health And Family Welfare,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yash Pal Khileree
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, AAG with
Mr. S.S. Rathore
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
27/02/2025
1. By way of the present contempt petitions, petitioner has
alleged non-compliance of the order dated 06.07.2020 passed by
this Court, whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner was
allowed in terms of the judgment dated 06.03.2020 passed in the
[2025:RJ-JD:11479] (2 of 3) [WCP-45/2025]
case of Sunita Kumari vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil
Writ Petition No. 1760/2020).
2. As per the order dated 06.07.2020, the petitioner was
required to furnish a certificate of fitness as required under Rule
13 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Sub-ordinate Service
Rules, 1965.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner has filed various representations alongwith physical
fitness certificate, but no heed has been paid by the respondents.
He submitted that even the appeal against the order dated
06.07.2020 filed by the respondents was also dismissed by the
Division Bench of this Court.
4. On the previous date of hearing i.e. on 17.01.2025, this
Court has passed the following order:-
"1. Issue notice.
2. Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, learned Additional Advocate
General accept notices on behalf of the respondents.
3. It is deemed expedient and hence, ordered that
petitioner's medical examination shall be done by the
Medical Board of AIIMS, Jodhpur in light of Rule 13 of
the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service
Rules, 1965.
4. The Director of the AIIMS, Jodhpur is requested
to constitute a medical board of three doctors and
assess petitioner's suitability for the post in question.
The Board may ask the petitioner to do all or any of
the acts which a Nurse Grade-II is required to
perform.
5. After the functional tests of the petitioner being
done, the Board shall furnish a report to this Court
indicating therein as to whether the petitioner is able
to discharge the duties of a Nurse Grade-II, including
but not limited to patient care, medical assistance,
[2025:RJ-JD:11479] (3 of 3) [WCP-45/2025]
monitoring procedures such as enemas,
catheterization, intravenous injections, infusion and
reporting etc.
6. The Medical Board shall be free to take Practical
Test of the petitioner.
7. List this case on 14.02.2025 along with S.B.
Writ Contempt Petition Nos.748/2020 and 751/2020."
5. The Medical Superintendent of AIIMS has sent a report dated
13.02.2025 to this Court, indicating therein that the petitioner had
multiple disabilities, his total locomotory disability is 91.93% and
he is not fit to work.
6. The report dated 13.02.2025 is taken on record.
7. The relevant part of the report reads thus:-
"Total Locomotor Disability calculated:91.93%.
The person is not fit to work as staff nurse grade II in
Labour room, Operation Theatre, ICU and
Emergency. He is also not fit to perform long duties."
8. In view of the report aforesaid, the petitioner's claim of
being fit to work is unsustainable. The respondents cannot be said
to be in contempt in any manner.
9. The contempt petition is therefore, dismissed. Notices are,
hereby, discharged.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
263-Mak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
