Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
State Of Raj And Ors vs Rajbala Yadav And Anr on 15 September, 2017
Author: M.N. Bhandari
Bench: M.N. Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
D.B. Writ Review No. 57 / 2017
1. The State of Rajasthan Through the Principal Secretary,
Ayurved Department , Government of Rajasthan, Govt.
Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The State of Rajasthan Through the Principal Secretary,
Homoeopathy, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. The State of Rajasthan Through the Principal Secretary, Unani,
Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
4. The Director, Ayurved Department, Ayurved Directorate, Ajmer
(Raj.)
5. The Director, Homoeopathic Medicine Department,
Homoeopathy Directorate, 7-Everest Colony, Lal Kothi, Jaipur
(Raj.)
6. The Director, Unani Chikitsa Department, Unani Directorate, 7-
Everest Colony, Lal Kothi, Jaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Rajbala Yadav D/o. Maliram W/o Shri Krishan Kumar, Aged
About 27 Years, Dhani Ahiran, Tan Dada, Fatehpur, Tehsil Khetri,
Distt. Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
2. Pramila D/o. Shri Rajbir Singh, Aged About 29 Years, Village &
Post Kidwana, Tehsil Chirawa, Distt. Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr GS Gill, Additional Advocate General with Mr HC Kandpal For Respondent(s) :
_____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR VYAS Judgment 15/09/2017 (2 of 3) [WRW-57/2017] This review petition has been filed against the judgment dated 12.4.2016. The judgment aforesaid was passed in the light of the earlier judgment of the co-ordinate Bench of this court in the case of "Yadvendra Shandilya & ors versus State of Rajasthan & ors", DB Civil Writ Petition No.10246/2013, decided on 26.2.2016. The State Government was given liberty to find out and ascertain genuineness of the experience certificate meant for grant of bonus marks.
Mr GS Gill, Additional Advocate General submits that a review petition was filed in the case of Yadvendra Shandilya (supra) but it has been dismissed. It is, however, submitted that the experience certificate for grant of bonus marks cannot be considered contrary to proviso to rule 19 of the Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani, Homoeopathy and Naturopathy Subordinate Service (Amendment) Rules, 2013. The experience for grant of bonus marks can be taken into consideration if the candidate gained it from the State or Central Government or the organisations referred in the proviso to rule 19, as amended, thus the judgment may be reviewed. The non-petitioners have not gained experience from the State or Central Government service apart from any other organisation referred in the proviso.
We have considered the submissions of the learned Additional Advocate General and perused the record.
It is admitted that similar review petition has already (3 of 3) [WRW-57/2017] been dismissed by this court in the case of Yavendra Shandilya and Special Leave Petition (SLP) is pending consideration before the Apex Court. We are unable to take different view than what has been taken by the co-ordinate Bench of this court in the case of Yadvendra Shandilya. The State Government would, however, be at liberty to take up the issue before the Apex Court in the light of the proviso to rule 19 of the Rules, as amended.
With the aforesaid observations, review petition is disposed of.
In view of the disposal of the review petition, application under section 5 of the Limitation Act is also disposed of.
(VIJAY KUMAR VYAS)J. (M.N. BHANDARI)J. bnsharma