Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11261 (RAJ)

SMT RAJ KUMARI v. STATE OF RAJ AND ORS

CW/7045/2003 · 2025-08-06

Anand Sharma

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:30312] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7045/2003 Smt. Raj Kumari wife of Ranvir Singh, Resident of House No.499, Krishna Nagar Colony, Bharatpur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through Secretary to the Government, Medical Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Director, Medical & Health Services, Directorate, Jaipur. 3. Joint Director, Medical & Health Services, Jaipur Zone, Jaipur. 4. Chief Medical & Health Officer, Bharatpur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC with Mr. Prakhar Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 06/08/2025 1. This matter was listed on 05.08.2025, however, nobody had put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, in order to provide an opportunity, the case was posted for today. Today also, even in the second round, nobody has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. 2. The writ petition was filed way back in the year 2003. Hence, after hearing learned counsel for the respondents, it was thought proper to decide the matter finally. 3. It has been contended by the petitioner in the writ petition that the petitioner participated in the recruitment process for the post of ANM in respondent-Department. However, by the [2025:RJ-JP:30312] (2 of 3) [CW-7045/2003] time, result of process was declared, necessary certificate was not issued by Rajasthan Nursing Council, Jaipur, which was an essential qualification for holding the post of ANM. Hence, under such circumstances, the petitioner had to file a civil suit before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bharatpur (for short ‘the trial Court’). The order dated 21.08.1996 was passed by the trial Court directing Rajasthan Nursing Council to declare the result of the petitioner and to send the same to the concerned authorities. 4. The aforesaid order dated 21.08.1996 was challenged by the respondent-Department as well as by Rajasthan Nursing Council before the Court of Additional District Judge No.2, Bharatpur (for short ‘the appellate Court’) however, the appeal was dismissed on 12.02.1997. After dismissal of the appeal, result was declared and ultimately appointment was given to the petitioner vide order dated 20.11.1998. Petitioner joined pursuant to the appointment order and thereafter, the instant writ petition has been filed with a prayer to direct the respondents to grant all consequential benefits to the petitioner with effect from 25.10.1996. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that petitioner was appointed vide order dated 20.11.1998 and her appointment was effective from the date of joining pursuant to order dated 20.11.1998. Hence, the petitioner was entitled to all the benefits arising out of such appointment only from the date of joining and no benefits earlier to that date can be claimed or granted to the petitioner. It has also been objected that the appointment order to the extent of grant of [2025:RJ-JP:30312] (3 of 3) [CW-7045/2003] benefit has not been challenged by the petitioner. Hence, learned counsel for the respondents has prayed for dismissing the writ petition. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record. 7. It has been an admitted case of the petitioner that appointment has been granted to the petitioner vide order dated 20.11.1998 and without showing any demur, protest or objection, the petitioner joined pursuant to aforesaid appointment order and no objection with regard to pay scale mentioned therein was raised by the petitioner. Present writ petition was also filed after an unexplained delay of more than four years. 8. Under such circumstances, the petitioner has utterly failed to establish any right to claim any benefit of appointment on the post of ANM from the back date i.e. from 25.10.1996 on which date the petitioner was not in service of the respondents. 9. In view of above, I do not find any reason to interfere in the instant writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed. (ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /22