Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Nirmal Singh Son Of Shri Suresh Chand Oad vs State Of Rajasthan on 13 October, 2020

                                    (1 of 3)                    [CW-12281/2020]


      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

            S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12281/2020

1.     Nirmal Singh Son Of Shri Suresh Chand Oad, Aged
       About 28 Years, Resident Of V.p. Ghasoli, Tehsil Kishan
       Garh Bass, District Alwar (Raj.)
2.     Meena Pahadiya D/o Shri Brijmohan Pahadiya, Resident
       Of Village And Post Khijuri District Sawai Madhopur Raj.
3.     Arvind Kumar Shukla Son Of Shri Chandrabhan Shukla,
       Resident Of Kalaram Ka Pura Post Khera Jamalpur, Tehsil
       Hindaun City, District Karauli (Raj.)
4.     Rahul Sharma Son Of Shri Kalyan Prasad Sharma,
       Resident Of Bihind Madan Mohan Temple, Near Chikna
       Faras, Karauli, District Karauli (Raj.)
5.     Chandraveer Singh Son Of Shri Ratan Singh Rathore,
       Resident Of 107, Near Of Rawali Pole, Karmawas
       Maliyan, Tehsil Raipur, District Pali (Raj.)
6.     Parwati Sewda D/o Shri Har Lal Sewda, Resident Of
       Fatehpura, Via Sihot Bari, District Sikar (Raj.)
7.     Suresh Dhaka Son Of Shri Madan Lal Dhaka, Resident
       Of Rampura, Post Motipura, Tehsil Nawa, District Nagour
       (Raj.)
8.     Shobha Rani D/o Shri Bhopal Singh, Resident Of 95,
       Maruti Colony, Near Pardaya Hospital, Sanganer, District
       Jaipur (Raj.)
9.     Pooja Kumari Meena D/o Shri Ramesh Chand Meena,
       Resident    Of     D-48,        Bhuneshwari             Vatika,   Karni
       Palaceroad, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur, District Jaipur (Raj.)
10.    Deepu Sahu Son Of Shri Kishan Lal Sahu, Resident Of
       Near Temple Of Kalyan Ji, Todaraisingh, District Tonk
       (Raj.)
11.    Gaurav Sharma Son Of Shri Vishamber Dayal Sharma,
       Resident Of V.p. Maloni Khurdtehsil Saipau, District
       Dholpur (Raj.)
                                                                ----Petitioners
                                 Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Special Secretary,
       Medical Health And Family Welfare Department, Govt.
       Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

                   (Downloaded on 14/10/2020 at 09:14:46 PM)
                                         (2 of 3)                    [CW-12281/2020]


2.      Director, National Health Mission, Swasthya Bhawan,
        Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.)
3.      Additional Director (Administration), Department Of
        Medical      And       Health     Service,        Rajasthan,      Medical
        Directorate, Jaipur (Raj.)
4.      Principal, S.m.s. Medical College, Jaipur (Raj.)
5.      Administrative Officer, Metro Manas Arogya Sadan Heart
        Care And Multispecialty Hospital, Shipra Path, Near
        Technology Park, Mansarovar, Jaipur (Raj.)
                                                                  ----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. G L Sharma
For Respondent(s)          :



HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order 13/10/2020 The petitioner by way of this writ petition, has challenged the action of the respondent in not issuing experience certificate to the petitioner.

Learned counsel submits that experience certificate is required to be issued. This court notices that the petitioner in the main writ petition has also challenged the action of the respondent in not awarding of bonus marks for length of the service to the petitioner. The post advertised is of Community Health Officer under the advertisement dated 31.8.2020 which is a post to be filled up on contract basis for those who possess a particular qualification as laid down therein. There is no provision for granting bonus marks for experience. Thus, learned counsel's demand for issuing of experience certificate has got no meaning as the same is not required for the purpose of moving an application for the post of CHO. (Downloaded on 14/10/2020 at 09:14:46 PM)

(3 of 3) [CW-12281/2020] The contention of the petitioner that bonus marks should be awarded for length of service rendered by the petitioners, is also wholly misconceived as the post of CHO is a separate post and working against the said post or holding another post, would have no nexsus to the post which is advertised. As per the nature of the course, it is seeing that the qualification laid down therein provided under clause-3 as under:-

"3. All candidates have to appear for a screening exam and short listed candidates a. having Certificate in Community Health (CCH)/ B.Sc. in Community Health will be posted on contractual post of CHO in SHC-H & WCs.

b. Who do not have certificate in Community Health (CCH) have to pass the 6 months bridge course successfully.

(i) If candidate is not successful in the Bridge Course in first attempt, he/she shall be given one more opportunity (at the willingness of candidate) and for this second opportunity the fees and other expenditure of Bridge Course shall be borne by candidate himself/herself.

(ii) If any candidate is not qualified even after availing second opportunity, such candidates shall not be considered for the contractual post of CHO."

Thus the scheme for selection is different from other post and no party can claim nor a candidate can by right claim that bonus marks should be given to him as the post is not a statutory post but is a purely contractual post.

In view thereof, the writ petition is found to be wholly frivolous and devoid of merits and the same is accordingly dismissed.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J NITIN/51 (Downloaded on 14/10/2020 at 09:14:46 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)