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 Institute Rajasthan, Jaipur.

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

4. Rajasthan Paramedical Council, Through Its Registrar, G- 1, Kisan Bhawan, Lal Kothi, Jaipur- 302016. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s)

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

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the pleadings as also the material placed on record.

2. By way of instant writ petition, petitioner raised a grievance for not considering his experience certificate dated 26.06.2018 (Ann.4) for awarding bonus marks due to which petitioner has been deprived to consider his candidature on merits, for [2025:RJ-JP:19922] (2 of 4) [CW-3219/2025] appointment on the post of Assistant Radiographer, pursuant to the advertisement dated 31.05.2023.

3. In the advertisement dated 31.05.2023, issued by the respondents, in respect of awarding bonus marks on the basis of experience certificate, following stipulations have been made: t½ vuqHko ds vk/kkj ij cksul vad 1- jkT; ljdkj ds vkns'k vkbZ-Mh-&92@fpLo-@xzqi&3@2023 fnukad 25-04-2023 ds vuqlkj ik= vkosndksa dks foKkfir in ds le:i dk;Z djus dh lsok vof/k vk/kkfjr cksul vad fu;ekuqlkj ns; gksaxsA 2- &&&&&&&&&& 3- vuqHko izek.k i= tkjh djus gsrq vf/kd`r@lR;kiudrkZ vf/kdkjh }kjk bl gsrq fu/kkZfjr izi= esa foKfIr tkjh gksus dh fnukad ls vkosnu dh vfUre frfFk rd tkjh fd, x, vuqHko izek.k i= gh ekU; gksaxsA 4-&&&&&&&&&& 5- &&&&&&&&&& 6- &&&&&&&&&& 7- vkWuykbZu vkosnu ds le; ik= vkosnd dks l{ke vf/kdkjh }kjk bl gsrq fu/kkZfjr izi= esa tkjh fd, x, vuqHko izek.k i= dks vfuok;Z :i ls viyksM djuk gksxkA fdlh Hkh izdkj dk fdlh Hkh le; vkWQykbZu dksbZ vuqHko izek.k i= Lohdkj ugha fd;k tk;sxkA (underline is mine) It would be apropos to reproduce the stipulation incorporated in the order dated 25.04.2023 as well, which governs the award of bonus marks in the present recruitment. The copy of the order dated 25.04.2023 is available on record and the relevant portion reads as under:- 1- foKfIr tkjh gksus dh fnukad ls foKkfir in ds fy, vkWuykbZu vkosnu djus dh vafre frfFk rd tkjh fd;s x, vuqHko izek.k i= gh ekU; gksaxsA fu/kkZfjr vof/k vFkkZr vkWuykbu vkosnu dh vafre frfFk mijkUr dksbZ vuqHko izek.k i= tkjh ugha fd;k tkosA vuqHko vof/k dh x.kuk vkWuykbZu vkosnu vkjEHk gksus dh frfFk ls Bhd iwoZ dh fnukad rd gh dh tkosxhA vuqHko izek.k i= dk izk:i ifjfk"V ^v* layXu gSA foHkkx }kjk fu/kkZfjr izk:i ds vfrfjä vU; fdlh izk:i esa tkjh fd;k x;k vuqHko izek.k i= ekU; ugha gksxkA (underline is mine) Indisputably, the experience certificate dated 26.06.2018, on

4. which the petitioner is placing reliance, has not been issued in the prescribed manner as stipulated in the advertisement dated

31.05.2023 so also in the order dated 25.04.2023, reproduced hereinabove and for such reason, bonus marks have not been awarded to petitioner. [2025:RJ-JP:19922] (3 of 4) [CW-3219/2025]

5. The issue in question has already been considered and decided by the Division Bench in case of Santosh Choudhary v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. D.B. Special Writ No. 351/2020, decided on 05.03.2021, wherein it has been held and observed that the candidate must satisfy the requirements of the conditions specified in the advertisement strictly, if he claims his entitlement for award of bonus marks on the basis of experience gained by him. For ready reference, the relevant portion of the judgment in Para Nos. 9 & 10 are being reproduced hereunder:- “9. A bare look at the advertisement makes it abundantly clear that for award of bonus marks towards experience, a candidate was required to produce the certificates issued by the authorised officer in the proforma specified. The proforma specified was appended to the advertisement itself. It is not disputed before us that the certificates produced by the appellant were not in prescribed proforma. Further, as per Clause 8 of the advertisement, the certificate issued by the authorised officer was required to be verified by Joint Director of the concerned zone. Admittedly, the first certificate dated 13.03.2013 though issued by the competent officer i.e. Chief Medical & Health Officer, Pali, was not counter signed by the Joint Director. The certificate dated 23.01.2018 was issued by the Block Chief Medical Officer, Jaitaran, who was not even competent to issue the certificate and the same was also not counter signed/verified by the Joint Director of concerned zone. In this view of the matter, the action of the respondents in denying the bonus marks to the appellant on the basis of the certificates produced cannot be faulted with. 10. It goes without saying that the conditions specified in the advertisement so as to make a candidate entitled for award of bonus marks towards the experience were required to be satisfied strictly. Obviously, there might be many more persons, who were denied bonus marks on account of the certificates produced being not in conformity with the conditions specified. Merely because, the appellant has approached this Court raising the grievance in this regard, the conditions incorporated in the advertisement cannot be directed to be relaxed qua her. We are opinion that so as to ensure the fairness and of the considered transparency in the selection process, it is absolutely necessary that the conditions specified in the advertisement for award of bonus marks are strictly followed.” (emphasis supplied) [2025:RJ-JP:19922] (4 of 4) [CW-3219/2025]

6. Since the experience certificate, relied upon by the petitioner, does not meet the requisite requirement and has not been issued in terms of the advertisement dated 31.05.2023 so also the order dated 25.04.2023, therefore, following the dictum of Division Bench, expounded in case of Santosh Choudhary (Supra) this Court is of considered opinion that respondents have not committed any illegality/ jurisdictional error/ perversity in not awarding the bonus marks to the petitioner, for his experience certificate dated 26.06.2018 in the present recruitment-2023 for the post of Assistant Radiographer.

8. As a result, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. Stay application and any other pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. TN/119 (SUDESH BANSAL),J