1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5061/07 Mohemmad Zahid vs. State & Ors. Date of order : 1/4/2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Om Prakash Choudhary for Shri Sushil Sharma for the petitioner. Shri Zakir Hussain, Addl. Govt. Counsel for the respondents. ****** Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved by non appointment on the post of GNM Nurse. The respondents advertised 2500 posts of GNM vide notification dated 4.5.07. Such appointment was to be made on contract basis. The contract was liable to be renewed periodically. The respondents required the candidates to submit their application for appointment by 25.5.07. The candidates were required to pass the Senior Higher Secondary or equivalent with diploma in Nursing from RNRC and registration as A-Grade Nurse. The respondents have rejected the candidature of the petitioner on the ground that her registration with Rajasthan Nursing Council was valid upto 31.12.2006 and not 2 thereafter. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the petitioner was required to submit the certificate with the application to the respondents, he could not get same renewed, but in any case, the petitioner was issued call letter on 12.6.2007 by which he was required to appear before the Interview Board on 20.6.07 and before that date he has got his certificate renewed which is evident from the endorsement of the certificate of registration. The endorsement shows that it was issued by competent authority i.e. Rajasthan Nursing Counsel and it was valid upto 31.12.2006. This fact was very much disclosed to the members of the Interview Board when the interview took place on 20.6.07. Even then his candidature was rejected and his case was not considered. Learned counsel argued that the candidates appearing at S.No.87 to 90 in the select list were all possessing lower merit than the petitioner in OBC category. The respondents have opposed the writ petition and submitted that since the 3 registration of the petitioner with the Nursing Council was not valid beyond 31.12.2006, therefore at the time of interview, the selection committee did not consider the petitioner as eligible because he did not have valid and renewed registration. Having regard to the facts of the case and considered the arguments aforesaid, I find that the contention of the respondents that on 20.6.2007 when the petitioner appeared before the selection committee, did not have valid and renewed registration with the RNRC, cannot be accepted. It cannot be believed that the petitioner when he applied for appointment as GNM, would not produce the renewed registration even though he already had got registration renewed on 3.5.07, which was valid upto 31.10.2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner produced for perusal of the Court registration certificate with the endorsement of the Registrar of the Nursing Council indicating so. The petitioner has prima facie been able to show that the candidates lower than him in merit have been appointed. 4 In the result, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider case of the petitioner for appointment upon his producing the original certificate and grant him appointment on the post of GNM. The respondents would be at liberty to verify the facts about the renewal of the registration from the Rajasthan Nursing Council and petitioner was required to produce before them the original of the registration certificate. The appointment of the petitioner would be made from the same date when the candidates below him in merit was so appointed. However, the petitioner would be entitled to only notional benefits for the intervening period. The appointment shall be made on the same terms and conditions as were in the case of others, who were appointed. Compliance of the judgement be made within a period of three months from the date its copy is produced before the respondents. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/