Naynesh Kumar Bhatt vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

Feeling aggrieved of rejection of his request for grant of bonus marks, the petitioner has approached this Court, while invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner applied for the post of Nurse Gr.II, pursuant to advertisement dated 30.05.2018. For the purpose of claiming bonus marks, he relied upon a certificate dated 03.07.2018, issued by the Joint Director, Medical & Health Services, Zone Udaipur, according to which, the petitioner had worked as MPW - Multi Purpose Worker (Male) under the scheme known as National Vector Borne Disease Control Program.

Mr. Ujjwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that petitioner having worked with the State Government is entitled for bonus marks, yet the respondents have illegally rejected his claim.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that in view of Rule 19 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965, the petitioner is entitled for bonus marks while laying emphasis on the expression "similar work".

It will not be out of place to reproduce second proviso to Rule 19, which reads thus:

"Provided that in case of appointment to the posts other than Pharmacist, which are not in the purview of the Commission, merit shall be prepared by the Appointing Authority on the basis of marks obtained in such qualifying academic examination or professional examination or both as specified in the schedule appended to these rules and such bonus marks as may be specified by the State Government having regard to the length of experience on similar work under the Government, National Rural Health Mission and Medi Care Relief Society."

Mr. Rajat Arora, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, inviting Court's attention towards the certificate dated 03.07.2018 contended that petitioner has worked as Multi Purpose Worker and that too under a scheme which is of the Central Government and not of the State Government, hence he is not entitled for bonus marks and his request for grant of bonus marks has been rightly turned down.

The respondents rejected petitioner's entitlement of bonus marks because neither the scheme, i.e. National Vector Borne Disease Control Program nor his work as Multi Purpose Worker fall within the condition No.7 of the advertisement.

A perusal of condition No.7 of the advertisement reveals that only those candidates, who have worked under the specified schemes promulgated by the State Government have been held entitled for grant of bonus marks, that too if the candidate concerned has discharged similar work that of a Nurse Grade-II.

A perusal of second proviso shows that the bonus marks are available with respect to the schemes specified by the State Government and that too in case the candidate has experience of similar work under such schemes. Since the petitioner has worked as multi purpose worker and not as a nurse and that too under the scheme of the Central Government, which is not specified by the State, the petitioner's claim of bonus marks is not valid. Scheme National Vector Borne Disease Control Program is not a scheme identified by the State for bonus marks.

As a result of the discussion aforesaid, this Court does not find any substance in petitioner's writ petition, for which it is hereby dismissed.

The stay application also stands dismissed.