[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State Of Rajasthan vs Krishna Satokiya ... on 16 March, 2026
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2026:RJ-JD:12438-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1006/2025
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Medical And Health Science (Group-Ii), Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, (Non-Gazetted), Medical And Health And
Family Welfare, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. The Director, State Institute Of Health And Family Welfare
(Sihfw), Department Of Health, Jaipur.
4. The Principal And Controller, Rabindranath Tagore Medical
College (Rnt Medical College) Udaipur, Rajasthan 313001.
5. The Superintendent, Maharana Bhopal Government
Hospital, Udaipur, Rajasthan-313001.
----Appellants
Versus
Krishna Satokiya D/o Shri Viram Dev Satokiya, Aged About 26
Years, Resident Of Sanjay Colony Rata Khet Malla Talai, Harsh
Nagar, Girwa, Udaipur, Rajasthan - 313001.
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Rajpurohit, AAG
assisted by
Ms. Kanchan Jodha
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Lucky Raj Purohit
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH
Order
16/03/2026
1. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that similar
appeals have been dismissed by this Court in D.B. Special Appeal
Writ No.594/2025, vide order dated 18.09.2025, which reads as
follows:-
"The appellants initiated recruitment vide
advertisement dated 31.05.2023 for the appointment on the
post of Lab Technician. The respondents-petitioners were
(Uploaded on 18/03/2026 at 04:23:08 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:12438-DB] (2 of 3) [SAW-1006/2025]
found eligible for appointment on the post of Lab Technician
and were thereafter called for document verification on
16.09.2023. The provisional merit list was issued in which
the respondents-petitioners found their name. In the final
merit list issued on 11.06.2024, the name of the respondents
was not mentioned even when they were standing in the
merit on account that the experience would not be counted
as the registration of the candidates was not with the
'Rajasthan Paramedical Council' as stipulated for grant of
bonus marks. The same was challenged in the writ petition
by the respondents-petitioners.
2. The learned Single Judge considered the issue and held
that the bonus marks ought to be given even for the
experience acquired during the period of 'Covid-19 Pandemic'
even if it was without the registration with the Paramedical
Council because the Government itself admitted that the
respondents-petitioners had worked as Lab Technician and it
is also a non-disputed factual matrix that the certificate of
registration with Rajasthan Paramedical Council was not
available but the advertisement dated 31.05.2023 was
special advertisement as far as the allotment of bonus marks
for period of 'Covid-19 Pandemic' is concerned.
3. The learned AAG submits that the mandatory
registration ought to have been there. Mr. Yashpal Khileree
submits that the mandatory registration was later on
acquired, however, Mr. Yashpal Khileree has drawn attention
of this Court to Annexure 14 dated 11.05.2021 which reads
as follows:-
" fo'k;kUrxZr ys[k gS fd dksfoM&19 egkekjh ds nkSjku izns"k esa
uflZax@iSjkesfMdy LVkQ dh deh dks ns[krs gq, jkT; ljdkj us lHkh ftyksa esa
vko";drk ds vuqlkj ;w-Vh-ch- vk/kkj ij uflZxa @iSjkesfMdy LVkQ dh HkrhZ
tkjh dh tk jgh gSA jktLFkku iSjkesfMdy dkSafly] t;iqj }kjk Mh,e,yVh ,oa
MhvkjVh f+}rh; o'kZ dk ijh{kk ifj.kke 08-05-2021 dks tkjh fd;k gS] ftldh
vadrkfydk bUVjusV ij miyC/k gS fdUrq muds izksfotuy izek.k&i= ,oa iath;u
izek.k&i= vHkh tkjh ugha fd;s tk lds gSA bl Øe esa Mh,u,yVh ,oa MhvkjVh
ds mRrh.kZ Nk=ksa }kjk iath;u izek.k i=ksa gsrq dkSafly ls bZesy ds ek/;e ls
fuosnu fd;k tk jgk gSA dksfoM&19 dh ifjfLFkfr;ksa ds e/;sutj vH;fFkZ;ksa dks
dkSaflya esa cqykuk lEHko ugha gSA vr% jktLFkku iSjkesfMdy dkSafly ds Nk=ksa ds
Hkfo'; dks ns[krs gq,s bUVjusV ds ek/;e ls tkjh vadrkfydk ds vk/kkj ij
lgkuwHkwfr iwoZd fu.kZ; ysdj vH;fFkZ;ksa dks lk{kkRdkj esa lfEefyr djus dk Je
djsa tSls gh izksfotuy izek.k&i= ,oa iath;u izek.k&i= tkjh dj fn;s tk;saxsa
rRdky lacaf/kr vH;fFkZ;ksa dks izsf'kr dj fn;s tk;saxsaA "
While relying on the same, he submits that the
Paramedical Council itself had taken a decision to relax the
(Uploaded on 18/03/2026 at 04:23:08 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:12438-DB] (3 of 3) [SAW-1006/2025]
parameters of registration during the extremely trying
situation of Covid-19. This Court finds that the relief granted
for the bonus marks in the experience in question which
otherwise is valid cannot be discredited to the respondents-
petitioners only because the registration to the Paramedical
Council was not there as a one time exception had been
granted looking into the Covid-19 times by the appellant
themselves. The Paramedical Council itself on 11.05.2021
had relaxed the parameters of registration looking into the
acute crisis faced by the society in terms of the medical
emergency.
5. This Court, thus, while keeping into sole consideration
the extreme sufferance of the society in the Covid-19 times is
not inclined to interfere in the grant of bonus marks by the
learned Single Judge. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. It is
made clear that such exception which has been carved out by
the Paramedical Council is only for the acute Covid-19 period
only.
6. This Court has also kept into consideration the fact
that the experience which was gained and following the
bonus marks which has been given were arising out of an
advertisement in which urgent temporary appointments were
made by the State looking into the Covid-19 crisis while
relaxing the conditions of registration and thus, the State
cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate at the same
time
7. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of."v
4. Consequently, the present Special Appeal (Writ) is also
dismissed on the same grounds.
5. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(SANDEEP SHAH),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
51-mohit/-
(Uploaded on 18/03/2026 at 04:23:08 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
