ASHOK KUMAR YADAV S/O MOHAN LAL YADAV v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CW/10442/2024 · 2025-01-17
Sameer Jain
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22533 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22533 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:2415] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10442/2024 Ashok Kumar Yadav S/o Mohan Lal Yadav, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Sundarpura, Post Beelpur, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus
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
4. The Superintendent, SMS Hospital, Jaipur. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11187/2024 Ram Gopal Dhaker S/o Kailash Chand Dhaker, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Tara Pipli, Thukrai, Tehsil Begun, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus
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.
4. The Joint Director, Medical And Health Services, Udaipur Zone, Udaipur.
5. The Chief Medical And Health Office, Chittorgarh. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11188/2024 Chitra Suman D/o Prem Chandra Suman, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Mali Mohalla, Near Khari Bawdi, Atru, District Baran, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus
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.
[2025:RJ-JP:2415] (2 of 3) [CW-10442/2024]
3. The Director (Non-Gazette), Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
4. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Baran.
5. The Principal Medical Officer, Sub District Hospital Atru, District Baran. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11250/2024 Priyanshi Surana D/o Naresh Surana, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Regar Mohalla, Singoli, Tehsil Mandalgarh, District Bhilwara, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus
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
4. The Joint Director, Medical And Health Services, Udaipur Zone, Udaipur.
5. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Chittorgarh. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Pratap Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC with Mr. Prakhar Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order 17/01/2025
1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon judgment dated 12.12.2024 passed in Hakimuddin vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. registered as S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14393/2024, and submitted that the said petition was decided in favor of the petitioners therein, thence the same ratio can be made applicable herein.
[2025:RJ-JP:2415] (3 of 3) [CW-10442/2024]
2. Further, learned counsel has submitted that in the said petition it was opined that despite the fact that the petitioners therein were not registered with Rajasthan State Allied and Healthcare Council RSA & HC (RPMC) during their experience period, however if they have performed an equivalent duty, they will be entitled for the grant of experience for the said period.
3.
Learned counsel for the respondents Shri Archit Bohra, AGC has not refuted the aforementioned contentions however has apprised the Court with the fact that the said judgment dated 12.12.2024 is assailed and an appeal is preferred against the same, however, till date no interim protection is made operative.
4. Considering the foregoing facts and circumstances of the instant matter and considering the consensus drawn inter-se the parties, this Court deems it apposite to allow the instant petitions in terms of the ratio encapsulated in Hakimuddin (Supra).
5. In view of the above, the instant petitions are allowed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(SAMEER JAIN),J DEEPAK/s-344, 346-347, 349