Allowed

Jagjeet Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC22 Jul 2020CW/4912/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a writ petition seeking an experience certificate. The court relied on a prior decision, held that the specific post designation was immaterial for the directive, and directed the respondents to issue the certificate within three days after verifying service span.

What did the court decide?

The respondents are directed to issue an experience certificate to the petitioner within three days of placing a certified copy of this order, after verifying the span of service rendered.

Jagjeet Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4912/2020

¶3

Jagjeet Singh S/o Shri Ajmer Singh, Aged About 29 Years, By Caste Majhbi, R/o 1 Spm, Sardarpura Jeevan, Tehsil Sadulsahar District- Sriganganagar (Raj.).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Medical And Health Department Secretariat Jaipur Through Its Director.

¶7

The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Sriganganagar. 3. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Rajya Krashi Prabandh Sansthan Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018 Through Its Secretary.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vivek Agarwal through Jitsi Meet App For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vandana Bhansali

¶10

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶11

Order

¶12

22/07/2020

¶13

Counsel to pay requisite Court fee within three days. Remaining defects pointed out by the Registry are waived.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by a decision dated 05.02.2020, rendered by this Court in SBCWP No.1560/2020 (Thana Ram Vs. State & Ors.).

¶15

Ms. Vandana Bhansali, learned counsel appearing for the respondents does not dispute the position of facts and law. She, however, submits that the case of Thana Ram was that of a

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CW-4912/2020]

¶18

Pharmacist whereas the present petitioner is seeking appointment on the post of Lab Technician.

¶19

According to the opinion of this Court, the issue is squarely covered by judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Thana Ram (supra). Whether the post applied for is that of Pharmacist or Lab Technician makes no difference - the Court had directed the respondents to issue experience certificate for the period during which the candidate had served the department.

¶20

In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to issue experience certificate to the petitioner, of course after verifying the span of service rendered by him. The requisite certificate be issued within a period of three days of placing certified copy of the order instant.

¶21

Needless to observe that petitioner’s claim for bonus marks will be considered by appropriate authority at the time of document verification/process of selection on the basis of experience certificate so produced by him in accordance with law and relevant rules/conditions.

¶22

The stay petition also stands disposed of.

¶23

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶24

92-skm/-

Jagjeet Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagjeet Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satyanarayan Swami Vs the State of Rajasthan

Kapil Jaiman Vs State of Rajasthan

Himanshu Khandelwal Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Kumar Vs the State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Raj.

Vijay Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan