Rameshwar Vyas vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:14904) on 1 April, 2026

    0
    40
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

    Rameshwar Vyas vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:14904) on 1 April, 2026

    Author: Nupur Bhati

    Bench: Nupur Bhati

    [2026:RJ-JD:14904]
    
          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                           JODHPUR
                     S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5750/2026
    
    Rameshwar Vyas S/o Shri Lajpat Rai Vyas, Aged About 42 Years,
    R/o 959 Near Vishwakarma Gate, Inside Ram Mandir Street,
    Bikaner (Raj.).
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
    1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
             Department Of Medical And Health Services, Govt. Of
             Rajasthan, Jaipur.
    2.       Joint Secretary To The Government, Department Of
             Medical    And      Health (Group-2Nd), Government
             Secretariat, Jaipur.
    3.       Principal Secretary, Department Of Medical Education,
             Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
    4.       The Commissioner, Department Of Medical Education,
             Medical Education Bhawan, Govind Marg, Jaipur.
    5.       The Director (Public Health), Department Of Medical And
             Health Services, Directorate, Health Bhawan, Jaipur.
    6.       The Chairman, M.d/m.s/d.m/m.ch Candidates Allotments
             Board-2026, Sms Medical College, Jln Marg, Jaipur.
    7.       National Medical Commission, Through Its Secretary,
             Sector 8, Pocket 14, Phase-1, Dwarka, New Delhi-
             110077.
                                                                      ----Respondents
    
    
    For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Nrapen Shankar Acharya with
                                     Mr. Jatin Khatri
    For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Tanuj Jain for
                                     Mr. Mukesh Dave, AGC
                                     Mr. Siddharth Tatiya with
                                     Mr. Manan Mehta.
    
    
                   HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

    Order

    01/04/2026

    SPONSORED

    1. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following

    prayers:

    “xxxxx

    (i) the respondent no.5, the Director (Public Health),
    Medical and Health Services, Jaipur may kindly be

    (Uploaded on 01/04/2026 at 05:54:24 PM)
    (Downloaded on 01/04/2026 at 08:44:58 PM)
    [2026:RJ-JD:14904] (2 of 7) [CW-5750/2026]

    directed to pass necessary orders and permit the
    petitioner to pursue the one-year Senior Residency
    Course in pursuance of allotment order dated
    05.02.2026 [Annex.9] and accordingly issue the NOC
    and necessary order of relieving them forthwith;

    (ii) the impugned action of the respondent Director
    may kindly be declared illegal, unjust and contrary to
    the circular dated 05.07.2022 Annex. Anne 10 10 as as
    well as provisions of the Rules governing the law of
    land and as such, the same may kindly be quashed
    and set aside with all consequential benefits;

    (iii) the respondents may kindly be directed to relieve
    the petitioner forthwith from present place of posting
    in terms of circular dated 05.07.2022 Annex.10 and
    also grant the appropriate leave as per the provisions
    of RSR, 1951, for pursuing their one-year Senior
    Residency Course in the respective allotted Govt.
    Medical Colleges;

    (iv) the impugned order (verbal/ written) if any issued
    by the respondent Director/ State, during the
    pendency of present writ petition, the same may kindly
    be summoned from the respondents and may kindly be
    quashed and set aside with all consequential to follow;

    xxxxxx”

    2. Brief facts of the case, in nutshell, are that the petitioner,

    after completing his MBBS from a recognized medical institution,

    was appointed as a Medical Officer under the Rajasthan health

    services. Subsequently, he qualified NEET-PG 2022 and pursued a

    postgraduate medical degree (MD/MS), which he successfully

    completed in November 2025 and got duly registered. Under the

    prevailing Teachers Eligibility Qualifications Regulations, 2022, one

    year of Senior Residency after post-graduation is an essential

    requirement for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor.

    Accordingly, pursuant to the notification dated 31.10.2025 and

    subsequent corrigenda, the petitioner applied for Senior Residency

    and was duly selected, with allotment lists issued on 21.01.2026

    and re-issued on 04.02.2026, directing candidates to join their

    respective institutions by 24.02.2026. In the meantime, the

    petitioner was posted as a Medical Officer at District Hospital,

    (Uploaded on 01/04/2026 at 05:54:24 PM)
    (Downloaded on 01/04/2026 at 08:44:58 PM)
    [2026:RJ-JD:14904] (3 of 7) [CW-5750/2026]

    Barmer, where he joined duties in late January 2026. Despite

    being selected for Senior Residency and complying with the State

    Government circular dated 05.07.2022 by informing his controlling

    authority through proper channel, the petitioner was not relieved

    from his present posting. It is the petitioner’s case that similarly

    situated in-service candidates were granted relieving and

    permitted to join their Senior Residency, but he was denied the

    same, allegedly due to verbal instructions issued by the

    respondent Director. The petitioner made repeated representations

    to the concerned authorities seeking relief from his current posting

    so that he could join the one-year Senior Residency course within

    the stipulated time, however, no action was taken, even though

    failure to join by the prescribed deadline would result in automatic

    cancellation of his Senior Residency allotment and aggrieved of

    the above, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

    3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue

    involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the

    order dated 16.02.2026 passed in SBCWP No.19839/2025 titled

    Dr. Yash Vardhan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.“. The

    relevant part of the order dated 16.02.2026 reads as under:-

    “18. It is a matter of fact that no reply to the application
    under consideration or counter to the additional affidavit has been
    filed by the State.

    It is not in dispute that the order which provides for
    submission of bank guarantee by the petitioners equivalent to the
    amount of service bond has been issued by the State of Rajasthan
    on 28.01.2026 and thus, there was no occasion whatsoever for any
    candidate to presume or apprehend imposition of any such condition
    prior to the said order coming into effect.

    19. It is also a matter of record that prior to issuance of
    circular dated 28.01.2026, the circular dated 01.04.2025 was
    holding its field.

    Clause 15 of the circular dated 01.04.2025 reads as under:

    “15. ;fn dksbZ Nk= fdlh Institute of National Importance (AIIMS,
    PGI, JIPMER) esa Fellowship ds fy, p;fur gksrk gS rks mls Hkh Fellowships mijkUr 2
    o”kZ dh jkT; esa jktdh; lsok nsus dh ‘krZ ij gh vuqefr nh tk;sxhA ”

    (Uploaded on 01/04/2026 at 05:54:24 PM)
    (Downloaded on 01/04/2026 at 08:44:58 PM)
    [2026:RJ-JD:14904] (4 of 7) [CW-5750/2026]

    And, Clause 15 of the circular dated 28.01.2026 reads as
    under:

    “15. ;fn dksbZ vH;FkhZ LukrdksRrj vFkok lqij Lisf’k;fyVh ikB~;Øe iw.kZ djus ds mijkar
    fdlh ^baLVhV~;wV vkWQ us’kuy bEikWVl (Any AIIMS/ PGI Chandigarh, JIPMER) तथा
    अन्य baLVhV~;Vw vkWQ us’kuy bEikWVl laLFkku* esa lhfu;j jsthMsUlh gsrq p;fur gksrk gS] rks mls jkT;
    ljdkj@ laLFkku }kjk ckaM jkf’k ds lerqY; cSad xkjaVh tek djkus ij vuqefr nh tk ldsxhA**
    Clause 15 of both these circulars deals with the situation
    where a candidate is willing to join an INI.

    20. Though, the respondents seriously dispute the applicability of
    Clause 15 of the circular dated 01.04.2025 upon SR-ship on the
    ground that the word used in Clause 15 of the circular dated
    01.04.2025 is “Fellowship” and not “SR-ship”, this Court in the case
    of Dr. Rohit Yadav (supra) considered the issue of SR-ship has duly
    referred to the order dated 01.04.2025 and has held as under:

    “16. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for
    the parties, taking note of the judgments cited at Bar and upon
    assiduous perusal of the records, this Court has made the following
    observations: 16.1 That PGIMER Chandigarh is an Institute of
    National Importance.

    16.2 That the RNT college, Udaipur upon an undertaking released
    the original documents of the petitioner.

    16.3 That the respondent No.3 has not released the provisional
    degree and NOC of the petitioner.

    16.4 That the circular dated 01.04.2025 issued by the Secretary
    permits the candidate for pursuing program/service in an Institute of
    National Importance for the respective period and thereafter
    completing remaining years of service as per Bond condition.

    17. While placing reliance upon Article 19 and 21 of the Constitution
    of India, 1950 and taking note of the fact that the petitioner has
    expressed his willingness to serve as a Senior Resident with the
    State for the remaining period, this Court in the interest of justice
    deems it apposite to allow the present petition with the following
    directions:

    17.1 Provisional degree of the petitioner be released along with NOC
    and requisite documents, if any.

    17.2 An undertaking in pursuance to the dictum passed in judgment
    Dr. Nishant Gopal (Supra), as on date be furnished to the State
    Government assuring compliance of the remaining Bond period in
    future.

    17.3 PGIMER Chandigarh to permit the petitioner to continue on the
    post of Senior Resident without any break.

    17.4 Respondent No.3 is directed to release requisite documents and
    NOC in favor of PGI Chandigarh.”

    Thus, it is not open for the respondents to argue that the Clause 15
    of the circular dated 01.04.2025 will not apply on a candidate willing
    to join an INI for SR-ship.

    21. Now, comparing Clause 15 of both the circulars i.e., circular
    dated 01.04.2025 and circular dated 28.01.2026, it is evident that
    the circular dated 28.01.2026 imposes an onerous condition upon
    the candidates of furnishing a bank guarantee equivalent to the
    amount of service bond. As the said circular came into effect only on
    28.01.2026 and the applicant/petitioner No.2 has applied at AIIMS,
    Delhi for SR-ship in pursuance to an Advertisement dated
    20.11.2025, which was issued much prior to issuance of the circular
    dated 28.01.2026 and even the online application form was filled on
    01.12.2025 in pursuance to which, the examination was held on
    03.01.2026, result of which was declared on 09.01.2026 and even
    the interview was held on 20.01.2026, this Court has no hesitation

    (Uploaded on 01/04/2026 at 05:54:24 PM)
    (Downloaded on 01/04/2026 at 08:44:58 PM)
    [2026:RJ-JD:14904] (5 of 7) [CW-5750/2026]

    in holding that the applicant/petitioner No.2 would stand governed
    by circular dated 01.04.2025 and circular dated 28.01.2026 cannot
    be applied retrospectively upon the applicant/petitioner No.2 herein.
    It is more than settled that a circular cannot be applied
    retrospectively, more so to the detriment of a candidate who has
    already participated in the recruitment process on the basis of a
    circular which was existing on the date of commencement of the
    recruitment process.

    22. It is also well established that a recruitment process commences
    with date of issuance of the Advertisement for recruitment. Applying
    the circular dated 28.01.2026 upon a recruitment process which has
    already commenced by issuance of the Advertisement on
    20.11.2025 would tantamount to altering the rules of the game mid-
    way and that too, without any rationale, transparency or
    justification.”

    4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the

    Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in SBCWP No.4504/2026 titled as

    “Dr. Ishant Kumar Sahu & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan &

    Ors.” vide order dated 19.03.2026, while dealing with similar set

    of circumstances as obtaining in the present case and following

    the ratio decidendi, expounded in case of Dr. Yash Vardhan

    (supra), observed as under:-

    “11. Considering the facts that the NEET – SS Exam and so also
    the declaration of the result of the said exam have taken place
    prior to the issuance of the circular dated 28.01.2026, it is more
    than established that the relevant and crucial events have taken
    place prior to the issuance of the said circular and thus, under
    no circumstances, the said circular can be applied upon the
    present petitioners. Hence, the petitioners would stand governed
    by the circular of the State Government dated 01.04.2025 which
    was in effect and operation on the date of the relevant and
    crucial events of the present case. Accordingly, the present
    petition deserves to be allowed and is allowed to the limited
    extent of governing the petitioners by the circular of the State
    Government dated 01.04.2025. Also, in view of the above
    findings, there is no occasion for this Court to deal with the
    validity of the circular dated 28.01.2026 in the present petition.

    12. As the petitioners have been issued allotment letters by their
    respective Super Speciality Colleges in pursuance to the NEET
    SS score card and they are required to report and submit their
    original documents with their respective allotted Super Speciality
    Colleges, the Principals of the respective medical colleges of the
    respondent – State Government are directed to ensure that in
    terms of Clause 16 of the circular dated 01.04.2025, the original
    documents of the petitioners are sent directly by the respective
    medical colleges of the respondent – State Government to the
    petitioner’s respective allotted Super Speciality Colleges.

    (Uploaded on 01/04/2026 at 05:54:24 PM)
    (Downloaded on 01/04/2026 at 08:44:58 PM)
    [2026:RJ-JD:14904] (6 of 7) [CW-5750/2026]

    13. As the submission of the documents is required to be done
    by the petitioners with their respective allotted Super Speciality
    Colleges in a time bound manner, it would be in the fitness of
    things to issue the following directions as well:-

    i. Considering the fact that the petitioners are required to report
    and join their respective allotted Super Speciality Medical
    Colleges as early as possible, let an e-mail attaching the
    scanned copy of the original documents of the petitioners be
    sent by the Principals of respective medical colleges of the State
    Government to the respective Super Speciality Medical Colleges
    of the petitioners immediately informing about the sending of
    the documents of the respective petitioners directly by the
    medical colleges of the State Government to the respective
    Super Speciality Medical Colleges; and

    ii. It be also communicated that though the provisional allotment
    letter requires the petitioners to produce all the original
    documents at the time of reporting at the allotted Super
    Speciality Medical Colleges, however, in terms of the circular
    dated 01.04.2025 and the present order passed by this Court, it
    is the State Government who would ensure the delivery of the
    original documents of the petitioners to their respective allotted
    Super Speciality Medical Colleges; and

    iii. As the medical colleges of the State are required to ensure
    delivery of the original documents of all the petitioners, in the
    eventuality of any such documents reaching the respective
    Super Speciality Medical Colleges beyond a particular date, it will
    not at all prejudice the allotment/admission of the respective
    petitioners in their respective Super Speciality Colleges

    14. The petitioners are also directed to immediately furnish an
    undertaking along with their respective provisional allotment
    letters with the State Government to the effect that they would
    serve the State Government for the period as stipulated in the
    bond executed and submitted by them, after completion of their
    tenure of Super Speciality course at their respective allotted
    Super Speciality Medical Colleges.

    15. The undertaking would also state that in the event they fail
    to serve the State Government, they would pay the amount as
    mentioned in the Bond to the State Government. As the
    petitioners have duly submitted their willingness to furnish the
    undertaking and even the learned counsel for the petitioners
    have made this submission at Bar, a copy of the undertaking so
    furnished by the petitioners also be filed before this Court, if not
    already filed, and be made part of the record so as to ensure
    that the condition stipulated in the undertaking are duly adhered
    to by the petitioners. The said undertaking be furnished before
    this Court within one week of furnishing the same to the State
    Government.

    16. It is also clarified that the said directions for release of the
    documents are being issued in light of the peculiar facts, more
    particularly considering Clause 16 of the circular dated
    01.04.2025.

    (Uploaded on 01/04/2026 at 05:54:24 PM)
    (Downloaded on 01/04/2026 at 08:44:58 PM)
    [2026:RJ-JD:14904] (7 of 7) [CW-5750/2026]

    17. It is also clarified that in case, any of the petitioners fail to
    join their respective Super Speciality Medical Colleges, they
    would be mandatorily required to serve the State Government
    as per the Bond executed by them and the State Government
    will be within their rights to take all possible measures of
    procuring the documents back from the respective Super
    Speciality Medical Colleges.

    18. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition along with
    pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. ”

    5. Learned counsel for the respondent-State is not in a position

    to refute the fact that the issue involved herein is squarely

    covered by order passed in the case of Dr. Ishant Kumar Sahu

    (supra).

    6. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of

    in terms of the order dated 19.03.2026 passed in the case of Dr.

    Ishant Kumar Sahu (supra).

    7. Stay petition as well as all pending application, if any, also

    stand disposed of.

    (DR.NUPUR BHATI),J

    69-/Devesh/-

    (Uploaded on 01/04/2026 at 05:54:24 PM)
    (Downloaded on 01/04/2026 at 08:44:58 PM)

    Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

    [ad_1]

    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here