[2025:RJ-JP:42911] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15346/2025 Pooja Nakra D/o Ishwar Nakra, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Dhiraj Taneja, 47, South West Block, Near Love Kush Marriage Home, Alwar, Rajasthan-301001. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Medical And Health Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj).302005. 2. Director, Non-Gazetted Medical And Health Services, Swathya Bhawan, C-Scheme, Ashok Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302007. 3. Mission Director, National Health Mission, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj). 4. Director The State Institute Of Health And Family Welfare Rajasthan, Jhalana Institutional Area, Near Doordarshan, Jaipur (Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC with Ms. Sweekriti Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 27/10/2025 1. The writ petition is filed with following prayer: “(i) That the respondents may be directed to grant the bonus marks, as mentioned in the aforesaid advt. 05.05.2023 and Guideline dated 25.04.2023, to the petitioner for working as Nursing Tutor. (ii) To direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for aforesaid recruitment by considering the experience of [2025:RJ-JP:42911] (2 of 3) [CW-15346/2025] Nursing Tutor as valid experience and awarding bonus marks for this experience.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner while referring judgment dated 12.03.2025 in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.63/2022 titled as State of Rajasthan and Ors. Vs. Savita Manmiya passed by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur submits that the controversy raised herein is no more re- integra and same is already decided by Hon’ble Single Judge in case of Savita Manmiya Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (SB CWP No.2835/2020) on 16.02.2021 and affirmed by Hon’ble Division Bench. 3. Learned counsel for respondents submits that considering referred judgments, the department will consider the representation, if filed to them. 4. Considered the grievance raised herein, the petitioner is given a liberty to submit a representation claiming benefit under the judgments as referred hereinabove 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 of Savita Manmiya (supra), 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 her representation. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, she has a liberty to approach this Court with fresh petition. Needless to say that if [2025:RJ-JP:42911] (3 of 3) [CW-15346/2025] petitioner is entitled for benefit under the ratio as mentioned herein, the same be provided without any delay. 5. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MONU /07