[2025:RJ-JP:44009] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19108/2024 Chandra Shekhar Shrimali Son Of Shri Jugal Kishor Shrimali, Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of Songiri Girls School Ke Piche Wali Gali, Songiri Kuwa, Bikaner, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To The Government, Department Of Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat Jaipur 2. Director, Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. State Institute Of Health And Family Welfare (Sihfw), Jhalana Institutional Area, Jaipur, Through Its Director. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Singh with Mr. Jitesh Kumawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 03/11/2025 1. Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with following prayers: “i) the respondents may be directed to include the name of the petitioner in the final merit list in his category (EWS) and petitioner may be given appointment and petitioner may be given appointment on the post of Nursing Officer pursuant to advertisement (Annexure-1) with all consequential benefits. ii) Any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper be also passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. During course of argument, learned counsel for respondent while placing reliance upon judgment in case of Anita Vs. Union of India and Ors. 2025 Supreme (Raj) 1825 = 2025 RJ (JD) 6024 submits that the petitioner is younger than the candidates who were selected due to elder in age than the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner while placing reliance upon judgment in case of Kaushal Kumar Gupta Vs. State of [2025:RJ-JP:44009] (2 of 2) [CW-19108/2024] Rajasthan & Anr. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3495/2014) order dated 09.03.2017 submits that the petitioner has secured equal marks as that of selected and appointed candidate but still the post remained vacant due to any reason, the petitioner is entitled to be considered by the respondent(s). 4. Learned counsel for respondent(s) submits that the petitioner is free to submit a representation and same shall be considered by the respondent(s) in accordance with provision of Rules. 5. Considered the grievance raised herein, the petitioner is given a liberty to submit a representation to the respondents-Authority within a period of 30 days raising all grounds and the respondents-Authority are directed to decide the representation in light of ratio laid down in case referred hereinabove with a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 30 days from date of receipt of representation. After passing the order, the respondents are under an obligation to communicate the decision to the petitioner either by way of speed post or through E-mail, if petitioner has provided E-mail in his representation. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, he has a liberty to approach this Court with fresh petition. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /85