Veerender Singh Siradhana, J. - (1.) THE petitioners after having participated in the recruitment process in response to the advertisement dated 26th February, 2013, for appointment to the post of Nurse Grade -II, have approached this Court praying for the following relief(s): - - "i) The Respondents be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioners for appointment on the post of Nurse Gr. II in pursuance of the advertisement dated 26.12.2013 at par the candidates who got appointment under NRHM Scheme on the post of GNM in the year 2008 and further the respondents be directed to award 30 bonus marks to the petitioners against the experience under NRHM Scheme; ii) The respondents be directed to give appointment to the petitioners on the post of Nurse Gr. II with all consequential benefits; iii) Any other order which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the Petitioner."
(2.) BRIEFLY , the skeletal material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised in the instant writ application needs to be first noticed. The petitioners submitted their application for consideration of their consideration for appointment on the post of General Nurse Male (GNM) under the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 2008, in response to the advertisement dated 26th April, 2013. Referring to Clause -8 of the advertisement, the petitioners have staked their claim for grant of 30 bonus marks. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, in S.B. Civil Writ Petition Number 4298 of 2008 (Manoj Kumar Sharma & Ors. versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.), a Coordinate Bench of this Court, issued a direction to the State -respondents, to accord appointment to the candidates in case the petitioners were found place in the merit list dated 28th February, 2009, of GNM with a further direction to make room for meritorious candidates instead of those who were lower in merit. Learned counsel though admits that the petitioners did not approach this Court in the year 2008, but submits that, had the State -respondents complied with the directions issued in case of Manoj Kumar Sharma & Ors. (supra), in letter and spirit, the petitioner would have been selected, and in consequence would have acquired the required experience while working on contract basis, and thus, would have become entitled for award of 30 bonus marks, which is the relief prayed for in the instant writ application. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, and with his assistance, perused the materials available on record.
(3.) AT the very outset, the learned counsel admitted the fact that in the year 2008, the petitioners did not approach this Court for the reason that the Coordinate Bench of this Court had already passed an order in the case of Manoj Kumar Sharma & Ors. (supra), which reads thus: - - "However, there are chances that the name of the petitioner(s), may appear in the State merit list, therefore, all the writ petition except Sharmila Paneri are disposed of with a direction to the respondents that in case the name of the petitioner(s) stand in the State merit list dated 28.02.2009 of G.N.M. and the advertised vacancies are available then they may be given appointment as per their merit even if the less meritorious persons are continuing, then they have to make room for the petitioner(s) whose name stands higher on merit in State merit list.";