Rajasthan. vs The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Medical,

Judgment

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Medical, Health And Family Welfare Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

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

3. The Director (Non-Gazette), Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s)

: Mr. Ram Pratap Saini, Mr. Aamir Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 12/05/2025

1. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record.

2. Petitioner has preferred instant civil writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, feeling aggrieved by non- consideration of her candidature for appointment on the post of Nursing Officer under Female-SC (Divorcee) Category, despite securing higher marks than the last selected candidate of her category in the recruitment-2023, pursuant to the advertisement dated 05.05.2023. [2025:RJ-JP:19820] (2 of 5) [CW-746/2025]

3. Indisputably, petitioner applied for the post in question under Female-SC (Divorcee) Category, relying upon the decree of divorce dated 12.05.2023. As per the advertisement dated

05.05.2023, the last cut off date for submission of Online application form is 04.06.2023 which extended till 11.06.2023 and the candidates belonging to “Divorcee” category were required to submit proof/ document of the divorce, prior to the last cut-off date. In the case at hand, petitioner has been granted divorce vide judgment dated 12.05.2023, which is prior to the last cut off date i.e. 04.06.2023. The photo copy of the divorce decree dated

12.05.2023 is enclosed with the writ petition as Annexure-3.

4. This has further emerged as an undisputed fact that in the final merit list dated 06.12.2024, the cut off marks under the category of SC Female (Divorcee) is 38.283 whereas the petitioner scored 50.510 marks. Thus, indisputably, the petitioner is higher meritorious candidate in her category than the last selected candidate in the final merit list, hence her appointment ought to have been considered on merits under her category.

5. Submission of counsel for the respondents is that the petitioner did not enclose/ submitted the document proof of her divorce and decree of divorce was not attached with the Online application form, hence her candidature was not considered under the “Divorcee” category.

6. Counsel for the petitioner, disputes the aforesaid contention and submits that there is no reason to believe that petitioner, despite having decree of divorce dated 12.05.2023 could not be enclosed while submitting the Online application form, however his submission is that even if for one or other reason, the decree of [2025:RJ-JP:19820] (3 of 5) [CW-746/2025] divorce could not be attached with the Online application form, or could not be found attached therewith, same was produced by the petitioner before the respondents at the time of document verification on 11.09.2023. Hence, on such technical error, a meritorious candidate like petitioner should not be deprived from being considered for appointment. In support, reliance has been placed on the judgment of Dolly Chhanda v. Chairman, JEE and Ors. [(2005) 9 SCC 779].

7. Having adverted to the rival contentions of counsel for both the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that indisputably, divorce decree in favour of petitioner has been passed by the Court of Additional District Judge No.1, Behror, District Alwar on 12.05.2023, much prior to the last cut off date for submission of Online application form i.e. 04.06.2023, in the present recruitment for the post of Nursing Officer, pursuant to the advertisement dated 05.05.2023. Thus, indisputably, petitioner possess the requisite eligibility and documents before the last cut off date for submission of Online application form, to consider her candidature on merits but it appears that her candidature has not been considered, on the pretext that the decree of divorce dated

12.05.2023 was not attached by the petitioner with the Online application form. Although, no plausible reason has come before this Court for not enclosing the decree of divorce by the petitioner with her Online application form, however if same has happened inadvertently, or due to any other reason, petitioner had produced her decree of divorce at the time of documents verification.

8. In the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Dolly Chhanda (Supra), Apex Court after duly considering the merits of [2025:RJ-JP:19820] (4 of 5) [CW-746/2025] the appellant, granted appointment to the appellant on the ground that even though she could not produce the document at the time of filling the online application form which was duly acquired by the appellant before the last cut-off date, same was produced in the second round of counselling as much as lower meritorious candidates have been given appointment, which is wholly unjust and perverse and such highly technical and rigid attitude by the respondents cannot be adopted. Para No. 7 of the judgment reads as under: “7. The general rule is that while applying for any course of study or a post, a person must possess the eligibility qualification on the last date fixed for such purpose either in the admission brochure or in application form, as the case may be, unless there is an express provision to the contrary. There can be no relaxation in this regard i.e. in the matter of holding the requisite eligibility qualification by the date fixed. This has to be established by producing the necessary certificates, degrees or marksheets. Similarly, in order to avail of the benefit of reservation or weightage etc. necessary certificates have to be produced. These are documents in the nature of proof of holding of particular qualification or percentage of marks secured or entitlement for benefit of reservation. Depending upon the facts of a case, there can be some relaxation in the matter of submission of proof and it will not be proper to apply any rigid principle as it pertains in the domain of procedure. Every infraction of the rule relating to submission of proof need not necessarily result in rejection of candidature.”

9. Indisputably, petitioner has secured higher marks than the last cut off marks as indicated hereinabove, hence the candidature of petitioner is required to be considered for appointment on merits for the post of Nursing Officer under the SC Female (Divorcee) Category, after the last selected candidate in this category and if vacant post is not available, by creating supernumerary post.

10. Accordingly, the writ petition succeeds and is hereby allowed. [2025:RJ-JP:19820] (5 of 5) [CW-746/2025]

11. Respondents are directed to consider the candidature of petitioner for appointment on the post of Nursing Officer under the category of SC Female (Divorce) pursuant to advertisement dated

05.05.2023, after the last selected candidate, and to grant notional benefits including seniority etc. though monetary benefits shall be accorded to petitioner from the date of appointment/joining. TN/9 (SUDESH BANSAL),J