Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sunita Chundawat vs State Of Rajasthan on 24 October, 2019
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 165/2018
1. Sunita Chundawat D/o Jalam Singh, Aged About 28 Years,
V/p Khari Kalamaba, Via Gulabpura, District Bhilwara,
Rajasthan
2. Bhanu Singh Meena S/o Prahlad Meena, Aged About 30
Years, Vpo Samel, Tehsil Lalsot, District Dausa, Rajasthan
3. Laxami Devi D/o Preetam Singh, Aged About 32 Years,
Village Bansikalan, District Bharatpur, Rajasthan
4. Laxmi Narayan Lavavanshi S/o Ghanshyam, Aged About
35 Years, Vpo Jawar, Tehsil Manoharthana, District
Jhalawar, Rajasthan
5. Harish Kumar S/o Bakhta Ram, Aged About 34 Years, V/p
Gangariya, Tehsil Ramsar, District Barmer, Rajasthan
6. Mamraj Meena S/o Ram Lal Meena, Aged About 29 Years,
Ward No. 8, Purana Bazar Jobner, District Jaipur,
Rajasthan
7. Narayan Lal Bheel S/o Roop Lal Bheel, Aged About 39
Years, Village Raghunathgarh, Post Sangramgarh, Tehsil
Asind, District Bhilwara, Rajasthan
8. Lalu Ram Chamar S/o Jaganath Lal Chamar, Aged About
31 Years, V/p Langach, Tehsil Kapasan, District
Chittorgarh, Rajasthan
9. Uma Gautam D/o Raj Mal Gautam, Aged About 27 Years,
C/o Radhyshyam Nagar, Shree Tent House, Shivpura,
District Kota, Rajasthan
10. Prem Singh Meena S/o Dharm Singh Meena, Aged About
27 Years, Vpo Luhasa, Tehsil Nadbai, District Bharatpur,
Rajasthan
11. Kushmeet Singh Meena S/o Phool Singh Meena, Aged
About 26 Years, Vpo Luhari Kalan, Tehsil Jahazpur, District
Bhilwara, Rajasthan
12. Ghanshyam Rawat S/o Hardan Rawat, Aged About 25
Years, Vpo Paniyala, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur,
Rajasthan
13. Roopesh Kumar Mochi S/o Janki Lal, Aged About 29
Years, Rathore Sheet Works Bus Stand Kekri, District
Ajmer, Rajasthan
14. Manraj Meena S/o Laddu Lal Meena, Aged About 26
Years, Village Vijaygarh, Post Khelniya, Tehsil Uniara,
District Tonk, Rajasthan
15. Neeta Bhati D/o Govind Singh Bhati, Aged About 39
Years, H.no. E-129, Rameshwar Nagar, Basni 1St Phase,
(Downloaded on 31/10/2019 at 08:29:46 PM)
(2 of 10) [WRW-165/2018]
District Jodhpur, Rajasthan
16. Nagesh Kumar Meena S/o Ram Kumar Meena, Aged
About 30 Years, Vpo Gadakhera, Tehsil Buhana, District
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan
17. Govind Prasad Sahu S/o Rameshwar Lal Teli, Aged About
27 Years, New Krishan Nagar, Ajmer Road, Kekri, District
Ajmer, Rajasthan
18. Bharat Ram Meena S/o Hari Narayan Meena, Aged About
28 Years, Village Vijaygarh, Post Khelniya, Tehsil Uniyara,
District Tonk, Rajasthan
19. Balram Meena S/o Ganga Wishan Meena, Aged About 28
Years, Vpo Malarna Chour, Tehsil Malarna Dungar, District
Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan
20. Surendra Kumar Chandel S/o Totaram Chandel, Aged
About 26 Years, Village Post Khawas, Tehsil Kekri, District
Ajmer, Rajasthan
21. Vinod Kumar Gocher S/o Janki Lal Gocher, Aged About 32
Years, Village Tarkasya, Post Borana Kalan, Tehsil Sangod,
District Kota, Rajasthan
22. Veerendra Singh S/o Ghanshyam Singh, Aged About 31
Years, Village Nagala Galleka, Tehsil Bayan, District
Bharatpur, Rajasthan
23. Satyanarayan Regar S/o Kailash Regar, Aged About 31
Years, Vpo Pranhera, Tehsil Kekri, District Ajmer,
Rajasthan
24. Mukesh Kumar Sharma S/o Lallu Prasad Sharma, Aged
About 33 Years, Village Gogolav, Post Hingotia, Via
Dausa, District Dausa, Rajasthan
25. Jagdish Prasad S/o Hukma Ram, Aged About 31 Years,
Village Bagheri Khurd, Post Bagheri Kalan, Tehsil
Kotkasim, District Alwar, Rajasthan
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principle Secretary,
Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan
2. The Principle Secretary, Department Of Ayurved And
Indian Medicine, Jaipur, Rajasthan
3. The Mission Director, National Rural Health Mission,
Department Of Medical, Health And Family Welfare,
Government Of Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg,
Ashok Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan
4. The Director, Department Of Ayurved, Directorate, Ashok
Marg, Savatri Circle, Ajmer, Rajasthan
5. The Director, Department Of Unani Medicine, Directorate,
(Downloaded on 31/10/2019 at 08:29:46 PM)
(3 of 10) [WRW-165/2018]
Ayush Bhawan, Sector 26, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan
6. The Director, Department Of Homeopathy Medicine,
Directorate, Ayush Bhawan, Sector 26, Pratap Nagar,
Jaipur, Rajasthan
7. Dr. Sarvapalli Radha Krishna, Rajasthan Aryuved
University, Kadvad, Nagaur Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan,
Through Its Registrar
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 166/2018
Ajay Pal Mandalawat & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 168/2018
Rahul Sharma & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 169/2018
Avdhesh Kumar Purohit & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 170/2018
Ajay Pal Mandalawat & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 171/2018
(Downloaded on 31/10/2019 at 08:29:46 PM)
(4 of 10) [WRW-165/2018]
Leela Joshi & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 172/2018
Ms. Meena Kumar Ahir & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 173/2018
Sharma Kumari Kahar & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 174/2018
Rajesh Kumar Raigar & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 175/2018
Mohan Lal & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
(Downloaded on 31/10/2019 at 08:29:46 PM)
(5 of 10) [WRW-165/2018]
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 176/2018
Anita Kunwar Rajput & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 177/2018
Vishnu Kumar Vaishnav & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 186/2018
Om Prakash Dadich & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 187/2018
Radhey Shyam Tiwari & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 188/2018
Sarita Kayat
----Petitioner
(Downloaded on 31/10/2019 at 08:29:46 PM)
(6 of 10) [WRW-165/2018]
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 189/2018
Narayan Lal Kumhar & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 190/2018
Deepti Sharma & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 194/2018
Chandrakala & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 200/2018
Praveen Dhakar & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 201/2018
Suman Meena & Ors.
----Petitioners
(Downloaded on 31/10/2019 at 08:29:46 PM)
(7 of 10) [WRW-165/2018]
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 202/2018
Manish Kumar Vijayvargiya & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 203/2018
Praveen Kumar Pancharia & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 204/2018
Mahaveer Nagar & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 205/2018
Sanju Kanwar & Ors.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 206/2018
Bharat Singh & Ors.
----Petitioners
(Downloaded on 31/10/2019 at 08:29:46 PM)
(8 of 10) [WRW-165/2018]
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhimanyu Singh Rathore
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Salman Agha and
Mr. Anupam Gopal Vyas for
Mr. Anil Kumar Gaur, AAG
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order 24/10/2019
1. These review petitions have been preferred by the petitioners claiming, in sum and substance, the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, humbly and respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may kindly call the entire record from the respondents pertaining to passing of the judgment dated 27.02.2018 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3907/2017 titled Ajaypal Mandalawat & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., and after examining the same, this Review Petition of the petitioners may kindly be allowed along with the prayers made interalia in the writ petition and the Judgment dated 27.02.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Court may kindly be reviewed qua the directions No.1 & 4 (Para 68, internal page 111 & 112 of the impugn order) which states as follows:
Direction Number 1 : "The contractual appointments against 1005 posts of Compounder/Nurse Grade Junior shall be only for the purpose of executing the NRHM Schemes."
Direction Number 4: "Since the respondent/State owes a duty to discharge all the medical obligations, therefore, such assessment shall entitle the respondents to issue fresh advertisement and make fresh recruitment in accordance with the requirements for the regular cadre." Further, the respondents may kindly be restrained from initiating fresh recruitment process in light of the financial and (Downloaded on 31/10/2019 at 08:29:46 PM) (9 of 10) [WRW-165/2018] administrative approval dated 08.08.2018 and circular dated 26.04.2018 by advertising fresh vacancies without completing the existing recruitment process of Ayurved Nurse/Compounder Grade Junior, 2013.
Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble High Court thinks proper in the given facts of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the order passed on 15.04.2013 was pertaining to NRHM and was not inclusive of the posts to be filled for the Ayurveda Department. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the documents in question also did not specify any regular posts for the Ayurveda Department, having been called to be filled-in on contractual basis.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that in accordance with the note sheet dated 27.02.2015, a wrongful connotation has been drawn by the respondents that the posts in question were contractual posts, and thus, ought to be covered under the NRHM. for the purpose of filling the contractual posts. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the information given to the Court that no approval has been sought for inclusion of Junior Nurse/ Compounders (Ayurved/ Unani/ Homoeopath/ Departments) in regular selection process undertaken by the Ayurveda Department, is not a correct information, and thus, it is a good ground for review.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents however, submit that due process of law was adopted, and the documents furnished before this Court were in line and length with the decision taken by the State to fill the posts in question, as per the NRHM Guidelines and as per the financial situation of the State. (Downloaded on 31/10/2019 at 08:29:46 PM)
(10 of 10) [WRW-165/2018]
5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties as well as perusing the record of the case, this Court is of the opinion that if in review petition, this Court is going to determine whether these posts were for the Ayurveda Department apart from that of NRHM or part thereof, then this Court shall have to enter into the merits, whereas this Court is in the constrained jurisdiction of review petition.
6. This Court also observes that the judgment passed was exhaustive, and has exhaustively dealt with the averments of both sides, and also the core contention of the petitioners seeking regular recruitment instead of contractual recruitment has been dealt with, and once such conclusion has been drawn in the judgment, then in the opinion of this Court, it will not be appropriate to grant any indulgence in the limited and constrained jurisdiction of review.
7. In view of the above, no interference is called for in the present review petitions and the same are accordingly dismissed. All the pending applications stand disposed of.
(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J 24 to 48-Zeeshan/-
(Downloaded on 31/10/2019 at 08:29:46 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)