[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State Of Rajasthan vs Shahnaz Khan (2026:Rj-Jd:12938-Db) on 18 March, 2026
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2026:RJ-JD:12938-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 859/2025
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Medical And Health, Secretariat Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. Director, State Institute Of Health And Family Welfare,
Jaipur (Rajasthan).
----Appellants
Versus
Shahnaz Khan D/o Shri Habib Khan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Village Pratapur, District Banswara (Rajasthan).
----Respondent
Connected With
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1060/2024
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And
Health Department, Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Directorate Medical And Health Services,
Tilak Marg, Swastiya Bhawan, Jaipur.
3. The Additional Director (Administration), Medical And
Health Services, Tilak Marg Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.
----Appellants
Versus
1. Gomi D/o Harkha Ram W/o Danaram, Aged About 33
Years, R/o Phulasar Chokhla, Tehsil Baytu, District Barmer
(Raj.).
2. Board Of Secondary Education, Ajmer Through Its
Secretary.
----Respondents
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 467/2025
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary To
Government, Medical And Health (Group Ii) Department,
Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Director, State Health And Family Welfare Institution,
Rajasthan, Jaipur
3. Joint Director, Medical And Health Department, Rajasthan,
Bikaner
4. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Pali
(Uploaded on 24/03/2026 at 12:26:54 PM)
(Downloaded on 24/03/2026 at 08:35:40 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:12938-DB] (2 of 4) [SAW-859/2025]
5. Rajasthan Nursing Council, Jaipur, Through Its Registrar
----Appellants
Versus
Jay Bala D/o Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 28 Years, 12, Rajendra
Nagar, Bageshwar Road, Pali, District Pali
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Rajpurohit, AAG.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manoj Bohra.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH
Order
18/03/2026
1. The matters come up on applications under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
2. Upon the appearance of learned counsel for the respondent,
The service is complete.
3. Having considered the application and the reasons stated
therein, the applications are allowed. The delay in filing the
appeals is hereby condoned.
4. Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that the
controversy involved in the appeals has already been decided by
the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court at Jaipur Bench in
D.B.Special Appeal Writ No.278/2023 (State & Anr. v.
Chandra Kalla) and other connected matters on 13.01.2026. The
relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced hereunder:
"10. While disposing off the SLP, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
directed the learned Single Judge to decide the matter afresh on
merits.
(Uploaded on 24/03/2026 at 12:26:54 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:12938-DB] (3 of 4) [SAW-859/2025]
11. When the matters were pending before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court, the learned Single Judge of this Court decided S.B. Civil
Writ Petition No.1457/2021 (Jahida Salma Vs. State of
Rajasthan) and other connected matters vide order dated
10.02.2022 relying upon the judgment passed by the Division
Bench of this Court in the matter of Ms. Firdos Tarannum
(supra).
12. In compliance of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10748/2018 (Gomi
Vs. The State of Rajasthan) was again decided by the learned
Single Bench at Principal Seat at Jodhpur dated 06.08.2024
relying upon the judgment passed by this Court in the case of
Jahida Salma (supra), however, the learned Single Judge decided
the case of Jahida Salma (supra) relying upon the judgment
passed by Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ms.Firdos
Tarannum (supra).
13. In our considered view, the learned Single Judge while
deciding the writ petition of Gomi dated 06.08.2024 has not
considered the merits of the case afresh, as directed by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.6559/2023 (The State
of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Gomi) with regard to qualification of
Health Worker (Female).
14. Learned AAG further submits that neither the learned Single
Judge of this Court while deciding the matter of (Jahida Salma
(supra) Bench at Jaipur nor learned Single Bench at Jodhpur has
considered the matter independently on merits with regard to
qualification for the post in question as directed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the matter of The State of Rajsthan & Ors. Vs.
Gomi.
15. Learned AAG further submits that the learned Single Judge
has not considered the required qualification for the post in
question, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
16. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
17. These appeals filed on behalf of the appellants-State deserve
to be allowed for the reasons:- firstly, the learned Single Judge
decided all the writ petitions by relying upon the judgments
passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ms.
Firdos Tarannum (supra). The said matter was challenged by the
appellants-State of Rajasthan before the Hon'ble Supreme Court,
however, the appeal was dismissed, as the matter relates to
appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III (Urdu); secondly
(Uploaded on 24/03/2026 at 12:26:54 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:12938-DB] (4 of 4) [SAW-859/2025]
the Hon'ble Supreme Court while remanding the matter of Gomi
(supra) to the learned Single Judge, where the post in question
i.e. Health Worker (Female) was same as involved herein,
directed to reconsider the matter on merits specifically on the
issue as to whether the Adeeb qualification is a proper
qualification for appointment to the post of Health Worker
(Female); thirdly in the facts and circumstances of the present
case, we are of the considered view that the learned Single
Judge has not considered the provisions of the Rules of 1965, as
there is no clause providing for equivalence between the Adeeb
qualification and the 10th Standard under the said Rules.
18. In view of the above discussion, the appeals are allowed.
The order dated 10.02.2022 is set aside. The matters are
remanded back to the learned Single Judge for deciding afresh in
the light of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of The State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Gomi (Civil
Appeal No.6559/2023)."
5. In the light of such joint submission, the present special
appeals are also allowed and while quashing and setting aside the
impugned orders, the matters are remanded back to the learned
Single Bench to deciding afresh in light of the judgment passed by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Rajasthan v.
Gomi in Civil Appeal No.6559/2023, strictly in accordance with
law. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
6. A copy of this order be separately placed in each connected
file.
(SANDEEP SHAH),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
110-112 Zeeshan
(Uploaded on 24/03/2026 at 12:26:54 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
