Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jagrati Pandya vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 18 April, 2023
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2023/RJJD/010527]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19181/2022
Jagrati Pandya W/o Shri Rajesh Pandya, Aged About 42 Years,
R/o Village And Post Bhiluda, Tehsil Sagwara, District Dungarpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Rural
Development And Panchayati Raj Department,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Additional Commissioner, Rural Development And
Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
3. The Zila Parishad, Dungarpur Through Its Chief Executive
Officer.
4. Project Manager Cum Executive Engineer (Water
Recourses), Zila Parishad, Dungarpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Khet Singh Rajpurohit
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG with
Mr. Kunal Upadhyay
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order 18/04/2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer that the experience certificate dated 13.04.2011 issued by the Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Sagwara may be got verified from the competent authority and if the same is found to be correct, then the case of the petitioner may be considered for appointment on the post of L.D.C. in pursuance of the Advertisement issued on 14.02.2013.
(Downloaded on 18/04/2023 at 11:28:37 PM) [2023/RJJD/010527] (2 of 4) [CW-19181/2022] Briefly, the facts of the case are that the petitioner, being eligible for appointment on the post of L.D.C., submitted an application form in pursuance of the Advertisement issued on 14.02.2013. The candidature of the petitioner was not favourably considered on account of the fact that the bonus marks for experience certificate were not granted to her. The petitioner preferred writ petitions on the earlier occasions, in which, interim orders were granted and a direction was also issued for countersigning the experience certificate issued by the respondent-Department.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one such experience certificate was issued on 13.04.2011 by the Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Sagwara. He submits that the experience certificate clearly shows that the petitioner was a member of the team of Social Specialist from 19.03.2010 to 31.03.2011. He further submits that this certificate is not being taken into consideration by the respondents on account of the fact that the same was not countersigned by the Chief Executive Officer and, therefore, no bonus marks were awarded to the petitioner in pursuance of the experience certificate dated 13.04.2011. He, therefore, prays that the respondents may be directed to consider the certificate dated 13.04.2011 after due verification of the same from the competent authorities of the Department and if the veracity of the same is not doubted, her candidature may be considered for appointment on the post of L.D.C. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that on earlier occasion when this Court issued directions, the case of the (Downloaded on 18/04/2023 at 11:28:37 PM) [2023/RJJD/010527] (3 of 4) [CW-19181/2022] petitioner was considered and the experience certificates submitted by her were taken into consideration and requisite marks were awarded to her. He submits that despite the bonus marks having been granted to the petitioner in pursuance of the experience certificate produced by her, the petitioner is not falling within the merit and, therefore, she was not given appointment on the post of L.D.C. He further submits that the experience certificate dated 13.04.2011 was not countersigned by the Chief Executive Officer, therefore, the same was not considered while awarding bonus marks. Learned counsel further assures this Court that if the veracity of the experience certificate dated 13.04.2011 is established, then they will consider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment on the post of L.D.C. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant record of the case.
The only controversy in the present case is the non- consideration of the experience certificate of the petitioner dated 13.04.2011 issued by Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Sagwara on account of the fact that the same was not countersigned by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Dungarpur. The purpose of getting the experience certificate countersigned is to check the veracity and correctness of the same. The certificate issued in the present case is not countersigned, therefore, the respondents are directed to get the veracity of the certificate (Annex.6) dated 13.04.2011 issued by the Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Sagwara verified from the competent authorities of the Zila Parishad and if the same is verified and its correctness is not doubted, the respondents shall consider the same for award of (Downloaded on 18/04/2023 at 11:28:37 PM) [2023/RJJD/010527] (4 of 4) [CW-19181/2022] bonus marks to the petitioner. After awarding the bonus marks, if the petitioner falls in merit, then the respondents shall consider his candidature for grant of appointment on the post of L.D.C. in pursuance of the Advertisement issued on 14.02.2013, needless to say, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible for appointment on the post of L.D.C. The entire exercise shall be completed by the respondents within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
The writ petition as also the stay petition stand disposed of.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 35-Vivek/-
(Downloaded on 18/04/2023 at 11:28:37 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)