The DHS’ order stated that the nurse was not eligible to be considered for appointment, as the recruitment was for the 2011 batch. On the other hand, Nurse Kajal Mehra graduated in 2014. She was recruited on a contract basis in the OBC-BPL category.
According to a recent UNI news report, the Selection Committee, after taking note of her educational qualification certificates, recommended her name for appointment to the post of staff nurse, vide office order dated March 16, 2022. She joined the Department, and after two years, a complaint was lodged with the Vigilance Department alleging that Mehra had been wrongly appointed to a post advertised for the 2011 batch. Initially, she was not given any opportunity, and her appointment letter was withdrawn.
Also Read:Himachal HC flags defunct lifts at Govt hospitals, seeks detailed report
After the High Court intervened, the Health department served a show-cause notice and, after due process, her appointment was withdrawn vide an order dated August 31, 2024.
She then approached the High Court again and submitted that there was no “misrepresentation or fraud” on her part and that the Selection Committee, fully aware that she had acquired the requisite qualification for the post in 2014, recommended her name for appointment.
After hearing arguments, Justice Sandeep Sharma observed, “No doubt, as per the procedure posts notified for a particular batch can be filled up from the candidates of that batch only, meaning thereby if posts were advertised for the 2011 batch, candidates, who had acquired the requisite qualification for the post in question up till that date, only could have been considered.”
The state government informed the court that, for three posts of Staff Nurses reserved for OBC-BPL, four candidates appeared: two from the 2010 batch, one from the 2017 batch, and Mehra from the 2014 batch. Two posts reserved for the OBC-BPL category were filled by candidates from the 2010 batch; however, because Mehra was senior to the other candidate, who was from the 2017 batch, the third post was offered to her.
The High Court noted, “Fault/mistake, if any, appears to have been committed by the Selection Committee, who, while recommending the name of the petitioner, failed to take note of the fact that the seat against which the name of the petitioner was recommended can only be filled up from the candidate belonging to the batch of March 2011, whereas petitioner had admittedly acquired essential qualification for the post in question in December, 2014”, reports UNI.
The High Court added that “no loss can be said to have been caused to the public exchequer inasmuch as the post was vacant, there was no other contender for the post, who can be said to have been wronged on account of irregular selection of the petitioner.”
While setting aside the order of withdrawal of the appointment letter of Mehra, the court ordered that “prayer, if any, made by the petitioner for regularization in terms of the regularization policy shall be considered in accordance with the law.”
Also Read:Himachal Medical Officers' Association defends doctor after viral video sparks outcry
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.