Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges
Acts
  • Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules 1965
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges
Acts
  • Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules 1965

    Arvind Kumar Sharma v. State Of Raj. & Ors.

    1. Heard on admission.

    2. By this petition, the petitioner has mainly prayed for quashing of Notification dated 6.2.2013 in so far as it relates to amendment in the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules 1965 providing for grant of bonus marks to the candidates having experience of similar work under the Government or Government agencies but not to candidates having experience of similar work in private concerns. According to the petitioner, he is eligible for the post of Pharmacist advertised by the State Government and has the experience of work of selling and distributing drugs in private retail sector similar to persons who are working in Schemes run by Government.

    3. The validity of similar provision for grant of bonus marks introduced by amendment in the Rules, was challenged in Writ Petition No. 17554/2013 and the Division Bench upheld its validity vide order dated 23.3.2015 by giving the following reasons:-

    “We do not find any substance in the grounds taken in the writ petition, inasmuch as the experience in private organisation, cannot be equated with the experience of similar work in Government/National Rural Health Mission and Medi Care Relief Society. The experience of work in Government organisation or Schemes, cannot be treated at par with the work in private organisations, in which the State Government does not have control, or supervision of the work. There is a reasonable classification based on intelligible differentia is treating the experience in Government organisations and Schemes, and private organisations.”

    4. The petitioner does not fulfill the requirement of grant of bonus marks. We find no good reason to take a different view as taken by the Division Bench in the above quoted order. The petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Arvind Kumar Sharma v. State Of Raj. & Ors.
    (May 26, 2015)