Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ved Pal vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 February, 2021
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2021 RAJ 101
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 678/2021 Ved Pal S/o Shri Onkar Lal Meena, Aged About 44 Years, (Physically Handicapped Candidate-Ol, Marks Obtained 40.389 Percent), Resident Of Near Jain Temple, V/p Thanawad, Tehsil Aklera, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan) Mobile Number 9571261836.
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Chief Secretary, Medical And Health Services, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical And Health Services, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.
----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yash Pal Khileree with Ms. Yogita Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta for Mr. K. S. Rajpurohit, AAG JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Judgment 08/02/2021
1. Mr. Khileree, learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset submitted that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment dated 15.12.2020 rendered in the bunch of cases led by Suresh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (SB Civil Writ Petition No.743/2020).
2. Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, learned counsel for the respondent - State, submitted that may be, the issue involved in the petition is covered by judgment of Suresh (supra) but the petitioner has (Downloaded on 09/02/2021 at 08:53:16 PM) (2 of 4) [CW-678/2021] approached this Court belatedly, hence, no relief can be granted to him.
3. Mr. Mehta argued that the petitioner has taken his remedy only after the judgment of this Court in the case of Anadu Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (SB Civil Writ Petition No.104/2020) and Suresh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (supra) came to be passed on 15.12.2020.
4. Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, learned counsel for the respondents, pointed out that first select list of physically handicapped candidates was issued way back on 24.01.2020 and cases of similarly situated candidates, whose petitions have been allowed on 15.12.2020, are already at final stage.
5. Mr. Khileree, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted in his rejoinder, that the petitioner's candidature was rejected treating him to be a candidate of other PH category. However, in light of general direction issued by the Jaipur Bench of this Court, the respondents invited all the physically handicapped candidates for the medical test at SMS Hospital, wherein, the petitioner too had appeared; a Medical Board examined the petitioner and found him to be having more than 40% disability in one leg, however, because of some deformity in other leg, his candidature was rejected while treating him to be an other PH category candidate.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, thus, argued that as the respondents themselves had called the petitioner for medical examination, he was waiting for a favourable response and, when he found that despite judgment passed in the case of Suresh (supra) nothing was done, he was advised to file the writ petition and seek similar reliefs/directions from the Court. (Downloaded on 09/02/2021 at 08:53:16 PM)
(3 of 4) [CW-678/2021]
7. Having regard to the facts of the case, this Court finds that the petitioner has not approached this Court in time. It is noteworthy that pursuant to the directions given in the case of Suresh (supra), the respondents have undertaken the requisite exercise on 28.12.2020. Thus, no absolute direction can be issued to consider the petitioner's candidature over and above the candidates [writ petitioner(s) in Suresh (supra)], who had approached the Court with promptitude.
8. Be that as it may; in the interest of justice, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of judgment passed in the case of Suresh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (surpa), however, with the caveat that the petitioner shall be offered appointment only in case any vacant seat in PH category remains, after according appointments to the candidates in whose favour orders have been passed by this Court.
9. It is, hereby, directed :
(i) That prior to transferring the vacant post (if any) of PH category candidate to General category candidate, petitioner's candidature shall be considered.
(ii) In case of vacancy in PH Category, respondent No.2 shall issue a notice to the petitioner for the purpose aforesaid.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear in the Office of respondent No.2 on the date fixed. Respondent No.2 or his nominee shall examine petitioner's original disability certificate(s) and if his certificate(s) show(s) him to be having 40% or more disability in one leg, he shall be treated eligible.
(Downloaded on 09/02/2021 at 08:53:16 PM)
(4 of 4) [CW-678/2021]
(iv) The respondents shall, thereafter, prepare fresh select list for PH category and place the eligible petitioner (after verification of documents) at appropriate place in the select list, of course according to his category.
(v) Appointment orders be issued thereafter.
(vi) The petitioner shall produce a certificate of fitness issued by a competent Medical Authority notified by the Government for this purpose. The certificate should clearly indicate that petitioner's physical difficulty is not likely to interfere with the efficient performance of his duties as Nurse Grade-II, as stipulated in Rule 13 of the Rules of 1965. The competent authority shall not be influenced by the medical reports, which have been discarded by this Court and record his independent finding on his own assessment.
10. Stay application too stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J 31-A.Arora/-
(Downloaded on 09/02/2021 at 08:53:16 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)