Abha Paigamber v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1750 of 2021 • Abha Paigamber D/o Bihar Lal, Aged About 27 Years R/o Sakrelibhatha, Baradwar, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, P.O. And P.S. Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Health Services, Indrawati Bhawan, Iiird Floor, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Divisional Joint Director, Health Services, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ----Respondents For the Petitioner :

Ms. K. Radhika, Advocate For the Respondents/State :

Mr. Aditya Bharadwaj, P. L.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board /03/2021

1. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is to the extent that the petitioner has not been granted the marks and has not been provided the requisite marks for the experience she has, while applying for the post of staff nurse. According to the petitioner she has, applied for the post of staff nurse for District Bilaspur Devision and in her application she has specifically mentioned that for the period between 22.01.2018 to 17.03.2019 she was working as a staff nurse under the C.M.O.(NIIM) for more than one year and later on

from 18.03.2019 to 28.08.2020 the petitioner has been working under the Dr. Bheem Rao Ambedkar Memorial Hospital at Raipur as a staff nurse and counting both these services the petitioner has an experience of more than 2 and half years and under the advertisement, the candidate was entitled for 3 marks for each completed years of service for the experience. Accordingly for 2 and half years of service experience, the petitioner was entitled for 7.5 marks against which the petitioner has been granted only 3 marks and as a consequence the total marks scored by the petitioner is 63.65 and she has been placed at serial No.92 in the provisional list which has been published. According to the petitioner in case if the petitioner is granted 7.5 marks for the experience that she has i.e. an additional 4.5 marks in addition to what has already been awarded, the total marks of the petitioner would rise to 68.15 and there shall be a substantial jump on the merits of the petitioner which would further brighten the chance of the petitioner in obtaining employment.

2. Given the said limited grievance the petitioner has raised in the present writ petition and also this specially submission by the petitioner that the final list of select list candidate has not been published and it is only the provisional list which has been published. Let the petitioner approach the respondent 2 to 4 by way of a detailed representation highlighting these aspects within a period of 7 days from today. The respondents No. 2 to 4 in turn shall consider and decide the representation its own merits at the earliest within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the representation of the petitioner and in case they find merits in the contention of the petitioner, appropriate remedial steps shall be taken before finalisation of the final list of the selected candidate.

3. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Parul