1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.6255/1996 JITENDRA KUMAR SHARMA & Anr. V/s STATE OF RAJ. & Ors. DATE OF ORDER ::: AUGUST 8, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAGHUVENDRA S. RATHORE Shri Narendra Mishra, for the petitioners. Shri S.L. Meena, Dy. Government Advocate. BY THE COURT : (ORAL) REPORTABLE 1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have questioned the order dated 2.7.1996 passed by the respondent No.3. Therefore, they have prayed to quash and set aside the said order and also for issuance of directions to the respondents to consider the petitioners for appointment on the post of Lab Technician. 2. After having passed the secondary School Examination in the year 1988, the petitioners had taken admission in Ojyanta Educational Institute, Kuchaman 2 Cit, District Nagaur, for the purpose of vocational course. Copies of the certificates issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, have been submitted on record today and they are hereby marked as Annexure X and Y. They took admission in the year 1990 for nursing course of two years. The said institution was recognised by the Government of Rajasthan and the syllabus was prepared by the Board of Secondary Education. 3. While the petitioners were pursuing the study in the aforesaid educational institution, the recognition was withdrawn by the respondents. However, on filing of writ petition (6111/91), the High Court had allowed the writ petition on 1.11.193. It was in furtherance of the decision of the writ petition that the examination of the petitioners, in the aforesaid course, was conducted by the Board of Secondary Education. After appearing in the said examination, the 3 petitioners were directed to undergo practical training of Lab Technician. Both the petitioners had undergone the said training at SMS Hospital, Jaipur and Zanana Hospital, Jaipur. Certificates issued in this regard, are on record as Annexures 1 and 2. 4. On completion of the training, department got bonds executed from the petitioners and the same were duly submitted. The petitioners were made to execute the bonds to the effect that they would accept the employment in the Government and on their refusal the amount spent for training, shall be recovered. The period of bond was of five years. 5. Despite of the requisite qualification having been attained by the petitioners and execution of the aforesaid bonds, in the terms given by the respondents, the petitioners were not given an opportunity to serve the Government. On the contrary, an 4 advertisement was issued on 24.6.96 by respondent No.2 in respect of the existing vacancies. On enquiry, the petitioners came to know that an order had been passed by the respondent No.3 on 2.7.96, by which ban was imposed for appointment to the candidates who had obtained training from Ojyanta Educational Institute. It is noteworthy that though the petitioners had initially taken admission in Ojyanta Educational Institute but later on they had completed the training from the Government Hospitals. Therefore, the aforesaid restrictions could not have been applied in case of the petitioners. Being aggrieved of the order passed on 2.7.96, the petitioners have preferred the present writ petition. 6. The respondents have contested the writ petition and in the counter filed by them, it has been stated that the Ojyanta Educational Institute, Kuchaman City, is not recognised by the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan. Further, it is 5 stated that for the purpose of recruitment to Lab Technician, examination of secondary conducted by the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, is the necessary qualification, along with the requisite training. 7. From the averments made in the writ petition as well as from the documents on record, there is no room of doubt that the petitioners have passed the Secondary Education from the Board of Secondary Eduction, Rajasthan and have also completed the requisite training. It would be noteworthy that earlier controversy had arisen that as to whether the person is eligible for consideration for the post of Lab Technician in terms of rule 11 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 read with Schedule apprehended thereto, are to be filled up 100% by direct recruitment and the eligibility for consideration was to pass Secondary School Examination and to undergo 9 months 6 training from any institute recognised by the Government. The said question had gone upto the Apex Court and was set at rest by the decision given by it on 30.1.2008 in the case of Jitendra Kumar v/s State of Rajasthan, civil Appeal No.1398 of 2006. Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the appeals filed by the candidates and held as under : “The question which fell for decision of the High Court was whether the appellants of these appeals were eligible for consideration for the post of Laboratory Technicians in terms of Rule 11 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') read with Schedule apprehended thereto, according to which hundred percent of the posts of Laboratory Technicians have got to be filled up by direct recruitment and the eligibility for consideration for the said post is that a person must pass out secondary school examination and undergo nine months training from an institute recognised by the Government. In the present, case, undisputedly, all the appellants have passed out secondary school examination and they have undergone nine months training not only from the institutes recognised by the Government but from the 7 Government hospitals itself. This being the position, we have no difficulty in holding that he appellants were eligible for the posts of Laboratory Technicians and the High Court was not justified in holding otherwise. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed, impugned orders are set aside and it is held that the appellants are eligible for consideration for the post of Laboratory Technicians. Undisputedly, prior to the filing of the writ petitions, no advertisement was issued for filling up the posts of Laboratory Technicians. This being the position, it is directed that the appellants shall be considered for appointment on the posts of Laboratory Technicians, whenever the same are advertised and if it is so advertised, they can apply for the same. If they are otherwise found suitable, appointment shall not be refused merely because they have crossed the upper age limit in which eventuality age bar in relation to these appellants shall be relaxed.” 8. Therefore, this writ petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned order dated 2.7.96 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the petitioners for appointment on the post of Lab Technician, whenever 8 the same are available. It is also directed that if an advisement is issued, the petitioners can apply for the same. It is further directed that in case the petitioners otherwise found suitable, the appointment to them shall not be refused merely because they have crossed the upper age limit in which eventuality age bar in relation to the petitioners shall be relaxed. In the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. (RAGHUVENDRA S. RATHORE), J. Chauhan/