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 1]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Dr. Navita Kumawat D/O Shree Harlal ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 September, 2022

Author: Ashok Kumar Gaur

Bench: Ashok Kumar Gaur

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10023/2022

Dr. Navita Kumawat D/o Shree Harlal Kumawat, Aged About 27
Years, Resident of Ward No.12, Dhod, Sikar (Raj.).
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
1.     State of Rajasthan, through the Principal Secretary,
       Medical and Health Department, Government Secretariat,
       Jaipur.
2.     The Director, Medical and Health Services, Swasthya
       Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
3.     The Chairman, NEET PG Medical and Dental Counseling
       Board 2022-2023, Government Dental College, Jaipur.
4.     National Medical Commission, through its Secretary,
       Pocket-14, Sector-8, Dwarka, Phase-I, New Delhi.
5.     The Chief Medical and Health Officer, Sikar District Sikar.
6.     The Medical Officer Incharge, Community Health Centre,
       Dhod, Sikar District Sikar.
                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :    Mr.Tanveer Ahamad, Adv.
For Respondent(s)           :    Dr.V.B. Sharma, AAG with Mr.Harshal
                                 Tholia, Adv.
                                 Mr.Angad Mirdha, Adv.



         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

                                      Order

22/09/2022

          The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner

challenging the condition No.2 of order/letter dated 03.06.2022

and further seeking direction to count her service till 30.04.2022,

as having worked at Community Health Centre, Dhod, Sikar for

the purpose of award of bonus marks for admission in the PG

Medical Course, based on the counselling of the NEET PG 2022.

                      (Downloaded on 24/09/2022 at 12:49:23 AM)
                                         (2 of 8)                [CW-10023/2022]



           The facts pleaded in the writ petition, in nutshell, are

that :-

     (I) The petitioner was appointed on the post of Medical

Officer vide order dated 27.03.2020 and she was posted at CHC

Dhod. The petitioner appeared in NEET PG 2022 as In-service

candidate and submitted her application form in the requisite

format, wherein she claimed that the benefit of rural service may

be extended to her for the period 27.03.2020 to 30.04.2022.

     (II) The petitioner has pleaded that the respondents issued

an order/letter dated 03.06.2022, wherein they provided a

condition of counting rural service at CHC prior to such place

become a Tehsil Headquarter. The petitioner has pleaded that

initially a notification dated 14.04.2020 was containing the list of

places/centres on which benefit of rural service was to be granted

and in the said notification, name of CHC Dhod, Sikar was

mentioned at Serial No.341.

     (III) The petitioner has pleaded that before issuance of

letter/order dated 03.06.2022, the respondents issued another

notification dated 18.05.2022, whereby certain centres were

deleted and some other centres were added. The petitioner has

pleaded that notification dated 18.05.2022 does not include the

name of CHC, Dhod, Sikar and as such, the petitioner was entitled

for granting the benefit of rural service upto 30.04.2022.

     (IV) The petitioner has pleaded that the respondents

(Controlling Officer) while sending the form of the petitioner to the

Competent Authority have counted service of the petitioner in

rural area i.e. at CHC Dhod, Sikar from 27.03.2020 to 21.02.2022

on account of CHC Dhod, Sikar said to be declared as Tehsil

Headquarter by order of the State Government dated 21.02.2022.

                    (Downloaded on 24/09/2022 at 12:49:23 AM)
                                         (3 of 8)                [CW-10023/2022]



           Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.Tanveer Ahamad,

while making submissions, highlighted the fact of rural allowance

being paid to the petitioner at CHC Dhod, Sikar till May, 2022 and

as such, the action of the respondents is challenged, suffering

from arbitrariness and misuse of discretion.

           Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once

the final notification dated 18.05.2022 was issued, the same was

the criterion for granting benefit of bonus marks and even if CHC

Dhod, Sikar was declared as Tehsil Headquarter on 21.02.2022,

the benefit of service rendered by the petitioner upto 30.04.2022

cannot be denied.

           Learned counsel submitted that the respondents were

conscious to insert or delete the different centres of CHC for the

purpose of granting bonus marks to the In-service candidates and

even if, there was some lapse on the part of the Authority about

not getting information regarding change of CHC Dhod, Sikar from

rural area to the Tehsil Headquarter, the same cannot be used

against the rights of the petitioner.

           Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted

that the relevant date for counting the rural service of In-service

candidate was 30.04.2022 and the petitioner was working from

27.03.2020 to 30.04.2022 and any information which is furnished

by the Revenue Department to the Medical Department, cannot be

made basis to deprive the petitioner from getting the said benefit.

           The respondents have filed reply to the writ petition

and pleaded that the claim of the petitioner for getting bonus

marks upto 30.04.2022, may not be granted by this Court, as the

place where the petitioner was working i.e. at CHC Dhod, Sikar,

was no more categorized as a rural area after 21.02.2022.

                    (Downloaded on 24/09/2022 at 12:49:23 AM)
                                        (4 of 8)                [CW-10023/2022]



          The respondents have pleaded that the very purpose of

granting bonus marks to In-service candidate is to ensure their

service in rural area and if the rural area remains no more rural

area and when such persons did not render their service in the

rural area, then they cannot get any benefit.

          Learned counsel for the respondents-State Mr.Harshal

Tholia submitted that the place where the petitioner was working

i.e. at CHC Dhod, Sikar was in fact a Tehsil Headquarter since

21.02.2022 and the Tehsildar, Dhod, District Sikar, vide his letter

dated 20.05.2022, had apprised the Authorities that the place

where the petitioner was working, was no more a rural area.

          Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the

Government has issued a notification dated 28.04.2017, wherein

Rule 22A has been amended in the Rajasthan Medical and Health

Service Rules, 1963 and explanation has been substituted in Rule

22A, wherein it is provided that rural area means a place other

than the Tehsil Headquarter, which is not a Municipal Town.

          Learned counsel submitted that the notification dated

28.04.2017 applies to all areas falling under the rural area and

moment of such area is declared as Tehsil Headquarter, would

have an effect of denying any benefit to a candidate who has not

worked in the rural area or who comes under the Tehsil

Headquarter.

          Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the

right, which the petitioner is claiming before this Court, is not a

vested right and the entire purpose of granting benefit of bonus

marks emanates from working in the rural area and since the

petitioner did not work in rural area after 21.02.2022, as such,

she cannot claim any vested right to get a bonus marks.

                   (Downloaded on 24/09/2022 at 12:49:23 AM)
                                           (5 of 8)                     [CW-10023/2022]



              Learned counsel submitted that even if there was some

lapse on the part of the Revenue Authorities in not informing the

Medical     Department      before       issuing      final       notification   dated

18.05.2022, such lapse would not create any right in favour of the

petitioner.

              Learned counsel further submitted that the relief which

has been sought by the petitioner is not confined to her own right

but there are other candidates in In-service category and if such

benefit is given to the present petitioner, then the same would

have a cascading effect on the other similarly situated candidates

and as such, this Court even if finds that some lapse has been

committed, relief should not be allowed to the petitioner, as it

would vitally effect the rights of other eligible candidates, who are

more meritorious and who have in fact rendered their service in

the rural area.

              Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the

only ground taken by the petitioner in his memo of writ petition is

denial of opportunity of hearing and even if, the opportunity would

have been granted to the petitioner, the same would have been

empty formality, as the notification dated 28.04.2017 statutorily

prescribes     that   any    area      which         comes        under    the   Tehsil

Headquarter, can no more remain as a rural area.

              I have heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the material available on record.

              This Court has carefully gone through the condition

No.2, which is prescribed in order/letter dated 03.06.2022. The

bare perusal of first part of condition/instruction No.2 provides

that the Controlling Officer before sending the application form

regarding     experience     of    In-service         candidate       to   the   State

                      (Downloaded on 24/09/2022 at 12:49:23 AM)
                                            (6 of 8)                   [CW-10023/2022]



Government, will keep in mind the notifications dated 14.04.2020,

28.06.2021 and 18.05.2022. The said condition was required to

be kept in mind by the Controlling Officer, who was to send the

requisite experience certificate and in the present case, the last

notification   dated    18.05.2022          has       been     made    criterion   for

considering the experience certificate of In-service candidate.

           This Court is at lost to comprehend as when the

notification dated 18.05.2022 has been made the basis for

awarding the bonus marks to In-service candidates and the name

of CHC Dhod, Sikar is no more there and it continues as per

notification dated 14.04.2020, as rural area, then the respondents

ought to have kept in mind the criteria as was prescribed in the

notifications dated 14.04.2020, 28.06.2021 and 18.05.2022.

           The second part of instruction/condition No.2 provides

that those In-service candidates, who have rendered their rural

service but later on, if the said place is changed to Tehsil

Headquarter from Municipal area, then before change of such

areas, the services will be counted and after such changes, the

services will not be counted.

           This Court if accepts the submission of learned counsel

for the respondents that even after issuance of notification

18.05.2022, whereby some places were erroneously left out and

certain places were changed from rural area to municipal area,

then person cannot claim such benefit, this Court cannot accept

the submission of learned counsel for the respondents. The State

Authorities were required to upgrade their entire list of centres

which they wanted to identify either as rural area or those earlier

rural area, later on converted into the Tehsil Headquarter or

Municipal Town.

                       (Downloaded on 24/09/2022 at 12:49:23 AM)
                                         (7 of 8)                [CW-10023/2022]



           This Court finds that, in the present facts of the case,

the petitioner who was working at CHC Dhod, Sikar from

27.03.2020 to 30.04.2022 cannot be deprived of getting the

bonus marks only on account of one letter written by the Tehsildar

in the month of May, 2022 and if such kind of variation will be

allowed, the candidates who are eligible to get the bonus marks

will only have doubt in their mind as whether they will get the

benefit or not. The State Government or its Officials who are

concerned to grant bonus marks to In-service candidates, for their

rural service, should simultaneously undertake the exercise by

taking into account the views of the different Authorities as well as

the Revenue Authorities, as whether the place/centre on which the

persons are working, are included in the list of Municipal area or

Tehsil Headquarter or they are in rural area.

           This Court further finds that in the present facts of the

case, the respondents have granted rural allowance to the

petitioner till May, 2022 and now they cannot be permitted to take

a plea that the petitioner ought not to have been granted benefit

of rural allowance or she should be deprived of counting of her

service or experience.

           The submission of learned counsel for the respondents

that claiming bonus marks is not a vested right and it will affect the rights of other similarly situated candidates, suffice it to say by this Court that the petitioner is concerned about her own right, as she has worked in rural area and she has been paid rural allowance till May, 2022 and only on account of a letter being written by the Tehsildar after 18.05.2022, the petitioner cannot be deprived to get her due right for counting her service. (Downloaded on 24/09/2022 at 12:49:23 AM)

(8 of 8) [CW-10023/2022] The submission of learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition, invoking the equitable jurisdiction of this Court, only on the ground that opportunity has not been afforded to the petitioner, as such, this Court may not interfere in the present writ petition, suffice it to say by this Court that the petitioner has to prove that her right has been violated by the respondents and due to violation of her right, she has suffered, on account of not getting bonus marks. This Court finds that even if other candidates who are eligible to get the bonus marks will get the same according to their rural service, hence, the petitioner cannot be deprived to get the bonus marks only on account of other candidates getting due benefit of rural service.

This Court finds that the respondents have not acted in a proper manner and they have deprived the petitioner from counting of services rendered by her in the rural area from 27.03.2020 to 30.04.2022 and as such, the respondents need to rectify the mistake.

This Court accordingly allows the present writ petition and directs the State Authorities to count service of the petitioner in rural area from 27.03.2020 to 30.04.2022 for the purpose of bonus marks as In-service candidate.

The order rectifying the proforma, will be issued by the respondents within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR), J Himanshu Soni/63 (Downloaded on 24/09/2022 at 12:49:23 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)