look news india
Jaipur, May 28 (HS). Rajasthan High Court has imposed a fine of Rs 25,000 on the state government in a case related to appointment in Nurse Grade II Recruitment-2013. Along with this, the court has ordered to give appointment to the petitioner with all benefits after document verification within a month. Justice Ganesh Ram Meena gave this order on Altaf's petition.
The court said that the petitioner was not selected in the first and second revised results. In such a situation, an unemployed person cannot be expected to keep checking the agency's website even after this. The government lawyer's statement that the candidate should have checked the website regularly is not appropriate and it is like slapping the unemployed person on the face. The court said in its order that it is the job of the recruitment agency to inform the selected candidate about the next stage. The court has suggested to the recruitment agency that proper time should be given between different stages of recruitment. It has been seen many times that candidates from rural areas are not able to view the concerned website due to technical reasons. In the petitioner's case also, revised results were released thrice and the successful candidates were called for document verification the very next day. In a state with a large land area like Rajasthan, asking the successful candidates from a remote area to appear in the capital in a few hours is unconstitutional. The petitioner who was successful in the recruitment cannot be denied appointment by saying that he did not appear for document verification, while he was not even informed about the selection in the correct manner. The court said that it cannot be expected from a candidate to keep visiting the department's website with the hope that the department will once again release the revised result.
In the petition, advocate Vibhuti Bhushan Sharma said that the Health Department had issued recruitment for Nurse Grade II on February 26, 2013. In the first selection list issued by the department on June 23, 2013, the petitioner was outside the cut off. The department released the second selection list on October 28, 2015, in which also the petitioner was not selected. After this, on February 9, 2016, the department again released a revised list, in which the petitioner was selected. It was said in the petition that the department asked the selected candidates to take up the post by March 28 the very next day. During this time, due to some posts being vacant, the department appointed candidates from the waiting list. It was said in the petition that he was not informed about his selection nor was his appointment order issued. On getting the information later, the petitioner submitted an application for appointment in the department, but he was not given appointment. On the other hand, the state government said that the petitioner was not given appointment because he was not present for document verification. It was the duty of the petitioner to regularly visit the department's website. After hearing both the parties, the court imposed a fine on the state government while ordering to give appointment to the petitioner within a month.