Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Ashok Kumar Gurjar And Anr vs State Rural Develp And Panchayati Anr on 6 May, 2022
Author: Ashok Kumar Gaur
Bench: Ashok Kumar Gaur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16008/2017
Ashok Kumar Gurjar And Anr
----Petitioners
Versus
State Rural Develp And Panchayati Anr
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kailash Chand Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Dr. Ganesh Parihar, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR Order 06/05/2022 Matter comes up on misc. application (23743/2018) filed by the petitioner for modification of the order dated 15.09.2017 passed by this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court on 15.09.2017 while issuing the notices in the writ petition had directed that the experience gained by the petitioners as certified by the experience certificate on 09.02.2017 and 18.03.2013 were to be considered for award of bonus marks and if the petitioners were found suitable and meritorious, then they were to be considered for appointment on the post of LDC but their appointment orders were not to be issued without prior approval of this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner-Mr. Kailash Chand Sharma submitted that the petitioner No.1 Ashok Kumar Gurjar had filed two experience certificates before this Court i.e. dt. 09.02.2017 and dt. 07.09.2017.
(Downloaded on 07/05/2022 at 09:14:04 PM)
(2 of 4) [CW-16008/2017]
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
inadvertently this Court only granted benefit to the petitioner No.1 for counting his experience as per experience certificate dated 09.02.2017, however, the experience certificate of the petitioner No.1 dated 07.09.2017 also entitles the petitioner for grant of bonus marks as petitioner had worked from 14.08.2003 to 30.09.2009 as 'Prerak' in Satat Sikhsha Abhiyan.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that if the experience gained by the petitioner No.1 as per experience certificate 07.09.2017 is allowed to be counted, the petitioner would get appropriate merit and he may also get appointment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an additional affidavit and submitted that the petitioner who was working in Satat Sikhsa Scheme of the Government was entitled to be granted bonus marks as the said scheme was taken over by the State Government vide order dated 02.10.2010.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the department itself had issued a circular dated 26.05.2017, whereby candidates who were working in NRHM and Satat Siksha Abhiyan, they were to be given benefit of bonus marks.
Learned Additional Advocate General-Dr. Ganesh Parihar submitted that the petitioner is not entitled for award of bonus marks as the petitioner was working as Prerak.
Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that as per notification issued for the appointment on the post of LDC in 2013 certain posts were specifically mentioned for the purpose of award of bonus marks as per condition laid down in Serial No.11 in the advertisement.
(Downloaded on 07/05/2022 at 09:14:04 PM)
(3 of 4) [CW-16008/2017] Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that there was no post of 'Prerak' and as such the petitioner was not entitled for award of bonus marks.
Learned Additional Advocate General further submitted that the circular dated 26.05.2017 also makes it clear that only on the posts mentioned in the advertisement, the different candidates were eligible for grant of bonus marks.
Learned Additional Advocate General further submitted that the petitioner while filling the application form had not mentioned any experience against the column provided for writing experience of the candidate and as such the petitioner was not eligible.
I have heard the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
This Court finds that the order dated 15.09.2017 inadvertently only mentioned the experience certificate of the petitioner No.1 dated 09.02.2017 to be considered for award of bonus marks.
This Court finds that the petitioner had also filed experience certificate dated 07.09.2017 wherein he is said to have worked from 14.08.2003 to 30.09.2009 in Satat Siksha Abhiyan.
This Court finds that if the respondent-Department has itself issued a circular wherein they had taken over all the programmes relating to the Education Department and all the schemes were transferred to the Panchayati Raj Department/Education Department, persons who are working in such different scheme cannot be deprived for the purpose of grant of bonus marks.
This Court does not find any substance in the argument of learned Additional Advocate General that for the posts mentioned (Downloaded on 07/05/2022 at 09:14:04 PM) (4 of 4) [CW-16008/2017] in the advertisement only candidates were eligible for grant of bonus marks.
This Court accordingly modifies the order dated 15.09.2017 and it is directed that the experience certificate of the petitioner No.1 dated 07.09.2017 may be considered for the purpose of award of bonus marks and if the petitioner is found meritorious and suitable, his case may be considered on provisional basis, however, no appointment order will be issued as observed earlier in the order dated 15.09.2017.
The application stands disposed of.
(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J Bhavnesh/707/Ramesh Vaishnav 34 (Downloaded on 07/05/2022 at 09:14:04 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)