Case title:
Sumitra Kumari v. The Department Of Medical, Health And Family Welfare, Government Of Rajasthan,
Date of Order:
25/04/2024
Bench:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ganesh Ram Meena
Parties:
Petitioner: Sumitra Kumari D/o Shri Bhagirathmal, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Post Chachiwad Bara, Tehsil Fatephur Shekhawati, District Sikar-332311 (Rajasthan)
Versus
Respondents: The Department Of Medical, Health And Family Welfare, Government Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Director (Administration), Medical And Health Services, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
SUBJECT
The High Court of Rajasthan rules that the Government Cannot Disqualify a Candidate Based on Grounds Not Mentioned in a Job Advertisement. In this case, the government rejected the application mentioning based on the other board, but in the advertisement, there was no specific mention of the particular board. Therefore, the court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to give the petitioner the job; she is eligible.
OVERVIEW
- The petitioner seeks to overturn the ruling dated 14.12.2019 that rejected her application for the Health Worker (Female) position. They also request appointment to the advertised openings on 18.06.2018.
- The Medical & Health Services Department, Government of Rajasthan advertised for a Health Worker (Female) position on June 18, 2018.
- According to Clause 5, the required qualifications are 10th Standard with Auxiliary Nurse Midwifery Training/Health Worker Female course and registration in the Rajasthan Nursing Council as B Grade Nurse.
- Petitioner's qualifications: In 2010, petitioner passed CBSE secondary school examination. In 2013, she completed the Auxiliary Nurse Midwifery Training Course offered by the Rajasthan Nursing Council in Jaipur. Registered with the Rajasthan Nursing Council (Registration No. 47740, dated 04/02/2014, valid till December 31, 2018).
- The petitioner presented supporting documents, including a mark sheet, certificate for educational and professional qualifications, and a registration certificate with the Rajasthan Nursing Council.
- The petitioner claimed eligibility based on documented evidence, which aligned with Clause 5 of the advertisement.
- However, the order dated 14.12.2019 rejected the petitioner's application, saying "due to other Board." Rejection is ruled unlawful and unfair because the advertisement does not specify information from any specific board.
ISSUES RAISED
- Whether the rejection of the petitioner’s application for candidature mentioning the reasons as rejected due to other Board is lawful.
COURT ANALYSIS
- The court found that the rejection of the petitioner's candidature on 14.12.2019 was unlawful, arbitrary, and violated the advertisement's terms and conditions.
- The writ petition is granted. The challenged ruling dated 14.12.2019 rejecting the petitioner's candidature is overturned.
- The petitioner has been declared eligible for the Health Worker (Female) job.
- The court asked Respondents to consider the petitioner for employment based on her merit as advertised on June 18, 2018.
- The petitioner is entitled to all advantages, including seniority, starting from the date of appointment of someone with lower merit. The petitioner is eligible for notional benefits during the interim time.
- Additionally, the stay application and any pending applications will be resolved.
CONCLUSION
In Conclusion, the petitioner's candidature for the position of Health Worker (Female) was deemed to be unlawful and arbitrary, with no justification in the advertised terms and conditions. As a result, the writ petition is granted, the challenged order dated 14.12.2019 is overturned, and the petitioner is declared eligible for the position. The respondents are required to evaluate the petitioner for appointment based on merit, giving all consequential advantages, including seniority, as well as notional benefits during the interim time.
