Dismissed

Ghamee Bishnoi v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Sept 2023CW/12140/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses writ petitions seeking direction to accept application forms for Female Health Worker posts. The Court found no evidence petitioners filed forms under the new advertisement and distinguished a similar precedent where forms were pending on the portal.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were dismissed as the petitioners failed to prove submission of application forms before the cut-off date.

Ghamee Bishnoi Vs State of Rajasthan — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:30551]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12136/2023

¶4

Meera D/o Shri Ram Lal, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Vpo Khara, Tehsil Sanchore, District Jalore (Raj.).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

The Director, State Health And Family Welfare Institution, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶9

The Additional Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan, Tilak Marg, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

Connected With

¶12

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12140/2023

¶13

Ghamee Bishnoi D/o Shri Narna Ram W/o Shri Prakash Kumar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Arnay Phulaniyon Ki Dhani, Padradi Khurd, Arnay, Tehsil Sanchore, District Jalore (Raj.).

¶14

----Petitioner

¶15

Versus

¶16

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶17

The Director, State Health And Family Welfare Institution, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶18

The Additional Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan, Tilak Marg, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.

¶19

----Respondents

¶20

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.S. Rajpurohit, AAG with Mr. Lucky Rajpurohit

(2 of 6)

[2023:RJ-JD:30551]

[CW-12136/2023]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

¶25

Order

¶26

19/09/2023

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶28

Since the controversy involved in both the above writ petitions are similar, therefore, they are being decided by this common order.

¶29

The present writ petitions have been filed praying for a direction to the respondents to accept the online/offline application form submitted by the petitioners for the post of Female Health Worker in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 19.05.2023.

¶30

Briefly, the facts noted in the present writ petitions are that the respondents issued an Advertisement on 15.12.2022 for filling up the post of Female Health Worker (ANM). The petitioners, being eligible, filled in the application form along with the requisite fees, however, the respondents by communication dated 19.04.2023 cancelled the Advertisement dated 15.12.2022. On 19.05.2023, the respondents again issued an advertisement for the post of Female Health Worker as per the provisions of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965. In the said Advertisement, there is a condition that those persons who have deposited the fees along with their applications in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 15.12.2022 are not required to deposit the entire fees and only the difference in fees amount shall be deposited by the candidates along with their application form. However, the online portal has not acknowledged the receipt of the application forms submitted by

¶31

(3 of 6) [CW-12136/2023]

¶32

[2023:RJ-JD:30551]

¶33

the petitioners in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 19.05.2023. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction that the application forms of the petitioners may be accepted by the respondents.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently submits that the petitioners applied for the post of Female Health Worker by filling in the appropriate application form in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 19.05.2023, however, the respondent No.2 has not accepted their online/offline application form. He submits that on account of the Biporjoy Cyclone, the internet services were down, and for this reason, the portal of the respondent No.2 was not working and the application forms filled in by the petitioners could not reach the respondents on time, therefore, no receipt of the same was generated by the respondents.

¶35

Learned counsel has relied upon the judgment passed by the Jaipur Bench of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13708/2023 “Girraj Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.” decided on 06.09.2023.

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the respondents opened the portal for receipt of the applications w.e.f. 13.09.2023 to 19.09.2023 only, and, therefore, he prays that the writ petition may be allowed and the respondents may be directed to accept the online/offline application forms of the petitioners.

¶37

Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents, while vehemently opposing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after the cancellation of the earlier Advertisement, there was a condition in the Advertisement dated 19.05.2023 that a candidate is necessarily

[2023:RJ-JD:30551]

[CW-12136/2023]

(4 of 6)

required to fill in the application form, and only the fees which has been paid by the candidate on earlier occasion will be adjusted while accepting their application form in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 19.05.2023. He further submits that the petitioners had never submitted an application form and, therefore, now there is no question to accept their application forms online or offline. He submits that the last date for filling in the application form in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 19.05.2023 was 18.6.2023 and, therefore, if the application forms of the petitioners are now accepted, it will open a Pandora’s Box and create a precedent and disrupt the selection process for the post of Female Health Worker. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be dismissed.

¶42

I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant record of the case.

¶43

The submission of the application form by the petitioners along with the requisite fees in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 15.12.2022 is accepted by the respondents, however, in pursuance of the fresh Advertisement issued on 19.05.2023, those persons who have filled in the application form on earlier occasion were mandated to fill in the fresh application form. The benefit of the fees having been paid on the earlier occasion was granted to such candidates and only difference of amount, if any, was required to be paid. It was also mentioned in the Advertisement that the fees paid by the candidates in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 15.12.2022 shall be adjusted in the present recruitment exercise taken by the respondents in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 19.05.2023. In this case the petitioners have

[2023:RJ-JD:30551]

[CW-12136/2023]

(5 of 6)

asserted that they have filled in the application form, however, they are unable to show anything on record that their application forms were filled in by them in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 19.05.2023.

¶48

Merely because a submission has been made that on account of the Biporjoy Cyclone, the internet services were down and, therefore, the petitioners could not fill in the application form, is not sufficient, more particularly, when the other persons who were similarly situated in the area have filled in the application forms and their application forms though have not reached the appropriate authorities, receipts of the same have been reflected on the portal showing it to be “Pending or Successful”.

¶49

The reliance as has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners on the judgment of the Jaipur Bench of this Court in the case of Girraj Meena (supra) is clearly distinguishable in the present set of facts as the petitioners before the Jaipur bench were able to clearly demonstrate that the application forms were filled in by them and the portal was showing the same to be “pending”, therefore, when the application forms filled in by the petitioners were not processed by the respondents though the portal was showing it to be “pending”, a direction was issued to the respondents to consider the same, whereas in the present facts, it is not on record that the application forms were ever submitted or filled in by the petitioners before the cut-off date. Thus, the judgment relied upon by the counsel for the petitioners is of no help.

¶50

It is also noted that the last date for filling in the application form was 18.06.2023 and in these circumstances, if the

[2023:RJ-JD:30551]

[CW-12136/2023]

(6 of 6)

petitioners are allowed to participate today, the persons who have not filled in the application forms before the cut-off date will be discriminated, therefore, the relief prayed for in this writ petition cannot be granted to the petitioners at this stage.

¶55

In view of the discussions made above, the writ petitions are devoid of any force and same are, therefore, dismissed.

¶56

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶57

58-59-/VivekMishra/-

Ghamee Bishnoi v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghamee Bishnoi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Goga Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

Aaved Hassan Vs the State of Rajasthan

Kana Ram Garg Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Amandeep Brar Vs State of Rajasthan

Ujjawal Joshi Vs the State of Rajasthan

Maksud Khan Vs State of Rajasthan