Disposed

Tarun Kumar Ramawat v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Dec 2023CW/1255/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan disposed of a writ petition filed by an employee seeking varied forms of experience certificates and consideration for direct recruitment with bonus marks. The court directed the response authorities to issue the requisite experience certificate in the prescribed format within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the competent authority to issue the requisite experience certificate to the petitioner in the prescribed format within two months.

Tarun Kumar Ramawat Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:42129]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1255/2023

¶4

Tarun Kumar Ramawat S/o Shri Prabhu Das Ramawat, Aged About 32 Years, By Caste Ramawat, R/o Shri Charbhuja Chowk, Narlai, Tehsil Desuri, District Pali (Rajasthan).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Medical And Health Services, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

Director, Medical And Health Services, Directorate, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.

¶9

Additional Director (Administration), Medical And Health Services, Health Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.

¶10

Chief Medical And Health Officer, Pali (Raj.).

¶11

Office Of Block Chief Health Officer, Sumerpur, Pali.

¶12

Navjivan Sewa Sansthan, By Pass Road, Opposite B.s.e., Gss, Raniwara, District Jalore (Raj.).

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner(s) : Mr Bharat Shrimali For Respondent(s) : Mr Shreyansh for K.S. Rajpurohit AAG

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶16

Judgment / Order (oral)

¶17

04/12/2023

¶18

This petition was filed in the year 2013 with the following

¶19

prayer:

¶20

i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent authorities may be directed to issue experience certificate which already issued by the respondent authority (Anx.3) in new prescribed format (Annx.11) duly signed and sealed by the respective authorities to the petitioner.

[2023:RJ-JD:42129]

[CW-1255/2023]

(2 of 5)

ii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent authority may kindly be directed to issue fresh experience certificate bearing no.70 dated 31.07.2019 (Annx.9) while mentioning the experience for the period of three years eight months and nine days instead of three years six months and nine days.

¶25

iii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent authority may kindly be directed to issue fresh experience certificate bearing no.71 dated 31.07.2019 (Annx.10) while mentioning the experience for the period of eleven months and twenty eight days instead of three years eleven months and twenty eight days.

¶26

iv) the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for direct recruitment on the post of Lab Assistant pursuant to the advertisement dated 29/05/2018 (Annx.5) as per their merit, after awarding the highest bonus marks to the petitioner.

¶27

v) any other order which is in favour of the petitioner may kindly be passed in the interest of justice;

¶28

The facts of the case, succinctly stated, are that the petitioner is having Diploma in Laboratory Technology. The petitioner stated to have worked as Lab Assistant at CHC Baghol for 04 years 07 months and 28 days as per experience certificate dated 27.06.2018. The petitioner also worked as Lab Technician in Rajeev Gandhi Mobile Van, Sumerpur from 01.05.2012 to 11.07.2013, as per experience certificate dated 11.09.2015.

¶29

The petitioner, along with one other candidate, filed Writ Petition No.8980/2018, which was disposed of with direction to the respondents to issue the experience certificate to the petitioners.

[2023:RJ-JD:42129]

[CW-1255/2023]

(3 of 5)

The controversy in the present writ petition is with regard to rule 19 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules 1965, which provides that bonus marks shall be awarded to employees working on contract basis in the respondentdepartment. However, this benefit was not extended to the respondents, who were working under the respondents on contract basis but through service provider/placement agency.

¶34

The petitioner emphasized on Notification dated 06.02.2013, inserting proviso to rule 19, whereby benefit of bonus marks was extended to candidates who have gained experience of similar under the Government, National Rural Health Mission and Medicare Relief Society. Still, the same benefit is not extended to the petitioner merely because he was engaged through service provider/placement agency.

¶35

The State Government vide notification dated 23.05.2018, under the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordiante Services (Amendment) Rules, has amended the requisite qualification and experience for appointment to the post of Lab Assistant, reckoning experience of working as Lab Assistant/Lab Technician in State Government hospitals, on contract basis or through service provider agency.

¶36

The respondents vide advertisement dated 29.05.2018 invited applications for recruitment to 1393 posts of Lab Assistant, however, despite Amendment Rules 2018 vide notification dated 23.05.2018, the benefit of bonus marks is not being made available to the petitioner merely because he was appointed through service provider/placement agency.

[2023:RJ-JD:42129]

[CW-1255/2023]

(4 of 5)

The petitioner submitted online application form and participated in the selection process. On 21.12.2021, the respondent department published interim merit list, in which cutoff marks for OBC category was 38.382. In this interim merit list, name of the petitioner did not appear though as per scheme of marks, the petitioner would be having 46.481 marks (70% of secondary marksx37.83=26.481+20 bonus marks= 46.481).

¶41

In compliance of the order passed by the High Court (in Writ Petition No.8980/2018), the respondent authority issued experience certificate but did not reflect actual period of work and also not in the new prescribed format. 10. Notices of the petition have been accepted by learned Additional Advocate General Mr K.S. Rajpurohit on behalf of all the respondents.

¶42

In the aforesaid facts, short controversy involved herein is whether the petitioner is entitled to issuance of the experience certificate from the respondent No.2 in prescribed format as per Annx.11 or not.

¶43

Having perused contents of the petition and after hearing the arguments, I am of the opinion that the petitioner has been unnecessarily driven to resort to litigation, given frivolous and nonchalant attitude of the official respondents in meeting with the requirements and issuance of certificate in the prescribed format. 13. Accordingly, without commenting any further, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the competent authority to issue the requisite experience certificate to the petitioner in the prescribed format, subject to verification of employment of the

¶44

(5 of 5) [CW-1255/2023]

¶45

[2023:RJ-JD:42129]

¶46

petitioner with regard to length of service rendered by him, within a period of two months from today.

¶47

Disposed of accordingly.

¶48

(ARUN MONGA),J

¶49

3-MMA/-

Tarun Kumar Ramawat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarun Kumar Ramawat 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nirmal Chand Lodha HUF Vs Land Acquisition Officer, Pali

Vivek Lodha Vs Land Acquisition Officer, Pali

Madan Singh Vs Land Acquisition Officer, Pali

Chandar Mukhi Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh Patel Vs State and Ors.

Jai Panwar Vs State and Ors.