[2025:RJ-JP:16602] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11113/2017 Rohitashva Kumar Sain, S/o Sh. Chiranjilal Sain, R/o Village Malavali, Post Khohara, Tehsil Laxmangarh, Distt. Alwar Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To The Government, Department Of Medical And Health, Secretariat, Jaipur, Raj 2. The Director, Medical And Health, Swasthya Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur Raj. 3. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Alwar Raj. 4. The Medical Officer, Community Health Centre, Pinan, Rajgarh, Distt. Alwar Raj. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None For Respondent(s) : Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 21/04/2025 1. The matter was called for twice but nobody appears on behalf of petitioner. 2. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed that even to allow the post of DDC Helper on contractual basis under the scheme of “Mukhyamantri Nishulk Dawai Yojna” at Community Health Centre, Pinan, Rajgarh, District Alwar, and has submitted that vide letter dated 26.04.2016 issued by the Deputy Secretary, Medical & Health (Group-II) Department to the Director (Public Health) Medical & Health Services, Rajasthan, Jaipur whereby 442 posts of DDC Helpers were sanctioned for engaging the above [2025:RJ-JP:16602] (2 of 2) [CW-11113/2017] helpers on contractual basis. The petitioner further states that on the basis of such communication, he applied in the office of Deputy Secretary Medical and Health Department yet he was not appointed on the aforesaid post. 3. On the basis of reply to the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that pursuant to letter dated 26.04.2016, at the relevant time, no vacancy was advertised of DDC Helper to be filled through contract or otherwise. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents further states that no advertisement whatsoever was issued by the respondents for inviting application against the aforesaid post, nor any other person was appointed merely on the basis of letter dated 26.04.2016. 5. Hence, the petitioner has utterly failed to show any right of consideration in the instant writ petition. The aforesaid position stated in the reply has not been countered by the petitioner by placing any advertisement on record to show any recruitment process whatsoever. 6. In view of the above, the writ petition filed by the petitioner devoid any merit and is liable to be rejected. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. 8. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J NEERU/214