Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Azimuddin Siddiqui vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:24946) on 22 May, 2025
Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2025:RJ-JD:24946]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7632/2025
Azimuddin Siddiqui S/o Azizuddin Siddiqui, Aged About 38 Years,
Resident Of Khan Colony, Rani Bazaar, 262 C Near Railway
Crossing Bikaner, Tehsil Bikaner, District Bikaner, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, State Institute
Of Health And Family Welfare Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Institute Of Health And Family Welfare
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Choudhary for
Mr. C.S. Kotwani
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Dave, AGC with
Mr. Tanuj Jain
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
22/05/2025
1. The present petition has been filed aggrieved of non grant of
bonus marks to the petitioner on the count of he having worked
with a Central Government organisation and not with the State
Government organisation as prescribed under Clause t (2) of
advertisement dated 05.05.2023 (Annex.3).
2. The case of the petitioner is that he worked at Railway
Hospital, Lalgarh, Bikaner during the Covid-19 period from
28.05.2021 to 06.08.2021. He having performed a similar nature
of work in the State of Rajasthan, was entitled for grant of bonus
marks in terms of circular dated 25.04.2023.
[2025:RJ-JD:24946] (2 of 4) [CW-7632/2025]
3. In support of the above submission, Counsel relied upon the
Apex Court judgment in Satya Dev Bhagaur & Ors. Vs. The
State of Rajasthan; (2022) 5 SCC 314.
4. Per contra counsel for the respondent Department submits
that it is only those employees who had worked with the agencies,
offices etc. of the State Government who would be entitled for
grant of bonus marks in terms of circular dated 25.04.2023.
Further, the candidate was required to have an experience
certificate qua the said period issued by the competent Authority
as prescribed in the advertisement. The petitioner neither had
worked with any agency of the State Government during the
Covid-19 period nor he had any experience certificate issued in his
favour by the competent Authority qua that period.
5. So far as the subsequent experience certificate is concerned,
the same would also be of consequence as firstly, the same did
not pertain to Covid-19 period and secondly, the experience
certificate was not for a period of 365 days.
6. Counsel further submits that even otherwise the controversy
rests settled by the judgment passed by a Division Bench of this
Court in Ratan Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.;
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13131/2018 (decided on
05.08.2019).
7. Heard the counsels and perused the record.
8. The two facts admitted in the present matter are as under:
I. The petitioner had work experience of the Covid-19 period
with an agency governed by the Central Government and not by
the State Government.
[2025:RJ-JD:24946] (3 of 4) [CW-7632/2025]
II. The experience certificate issued qua the said period was not
of the competent Authority as prescribed in advertisement dated
05.05.2023.
9. So far as the clause providing for bonus marks only to the
incumbents who had worked with the State of Rajasthan is
concerned, it has already been settled in Ratan Singh's case
(supra) that the said clause cannot be termed to be
discriminatory or arbitrary. Therein, the Division Bench observed
and held as under:
"This Court is of the opinion that the argument has
no merit. In Daulat Ram - as indeed in Gaurav
Kumar Sen, this Court highlighted that the grant of
bonus marks is a benefit which cannot be claimed as
a matter of right. If the State chooses to prioritize
employees working in its establishment or directly in
relation to a programme evolved by it and it chooses
not to grant such benefit to others, this is neither
discriminatory nor arbitrary. Therefore, the challenge
to the amended rule cannot be accepted."
10. So far as the judgment as relied upon by counsel for the
petitioner in Satya Dev Bhagaur (supra) is concerned, therein
too, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed and held as under:
"22. We are in complete agreement with the aforesaid
observations of the Division Bench. We find that the
policy of the State of Rajasthan to restrict the benefit of
bonus marks only to such employees who have worked
under different organizations in the State of Rajasthan
and to employees working under the NHM/NRHM
schemes in the State of Rajasthan, cannot be said to be
arbitrary."
[2025:RJ-JD:24946] (4 of 4) [CW-7632/2025]
11. In view of the above settled position of law, the petitioner
herein is not entitled for any relief and the writ petition is hence,
dismissed.
14. Stay petition and pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J
293-manila/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
