S.B. C. Writ Petition No. 4390/2010. (Muneshi Bai Meena Vs. State of Raj. & ors.) Date of Order: 31/03/2010. HON'BLE MR. MOHAMMAD RAFIQ,J. Mr. Vinod Singhal, for petitioner. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that since the petitioner has been working on the post of Nurse on ad hoc temporary basis since March, 2004, the respondents while they are making appointments on regular basis pursuant to advertisement dated 23.2.2010 are under legal obligation to give preference in the matter of such appointments. The learned counsel submitted that in the past also, the respondents have given such preference in regard to the selections in the year 2009. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed on ad hoc temporary basis but such benefit is to be given to those who are selected on regular basis. The appointees on ad hoc temporary basis can of course claim relaxation in the matter of upper age-limit if the regular selections have not been held for a number of years. However, the contention that they should be given preferential treatment over other candidates from open market in the same selection process cannot be accepted. On being pointedly asked, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is also eligible to compete for appointment against the post advertised by the respondents. In the circumstances, the petitioner if she is eligible may also apply to compete for appointment along with other eligible candidates in response to the advertisement issued for the post. I find no merit in the petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J. Gandhi/-P.A. Item no. 48