Radheyshyam and ors. Vs. State

Radheyshyam and ors. vs State

Disposition Petition allowed Court Rajasthan Decided Apr 11, 1991

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/750656

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/750656
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: I.S. Israni, J.
Decided On: Apr 11, 1991
Case Number: S.B.C.W.P. Nos. 3724, 3966 and 4915 of 1990
Subject: Constitution
Disposition: Petition allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Rajasthan Nursing, Midwives, Health Visitors and Auxiliary Nurses and Midwives Registration Act, 1964 - Science subject not compulsory for admission in Nursing and Midwives course--Matter already decided in two other cases--Held, petitioners are eligible for admission to Nursing and Midwives course.;All the above pe...

Key legal issue: Constitution
Outcome / disposition: Petition allowed
Acts & sections: Constitution of India - Article 226; Midwives Registration Act, 1964 - Sections 13

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Radheyshyam and ors.

Advocate Virendra Lodha and; Sanjay Pareek, Advs.

Respondent

State

Advocate Deepa Ajwani, Asstt. Govt. Adv.

Legal References

Acts: Constitution of India - Article 226; Midwives Registration Act, 1964 - Sections 13
Cases Referred: and Iqbal Ahmed v. State of Rajasthan
Reported In: AIR1992Raj12; 1991(2)WLN481

Excerpt

.....control test is one of the important tests, but is not to be taken as the sole test. it is also required to be examined whether the person was fully integrated into the employers concern or has remained apart from and independent of it. the other facts which may be relevant are as to who has the power to select and dismiss, to pay remuneration, to organize the work, etc. a full time worker usually works in a week for 40 hours or more depending on the award or agreement. if a person falls under the definition of workman under section 2(s) and does not fall in any excluded category, he will be covered by the definition of workman under the i.d. act, and he will be entitled to all the benefits under the said act. a perusal of section 2(s) indicates that it does not specifically refer to a part-time workman nor does it specifically exclude a part-time workman from the definition of :workman. since the number of hours is not the determining criterion for deciding whether a person falls within the definition of workman or not, it cannot be said that a part-time worker is not a workman within the meaning of the provisions of the i.d. act. however, to decide the status of a worker rendering services for less than 40 hours a week, various aspects are required to be considered. the control test, the integration test and all the other relevant tests are as much applicable for deciding the status of a person rendering service on part-time basis as these tests are required to be applied for deciding the status of a person rendering the services on full-time basis. since persons may be engaged for part-time work for various reasons, while deciding the question whether a person rendering services on part-time basis is a workman or not, the nature of the industry, the nature of services being rendered by the person, the terms and conditions of engagement and various other factors will have to be taken into consideration before coming to the conclusion whether such a person..........secondary examination could be denied admission' to three years general nursing course (male) only on the ground that they have not passed higher secondary examination with science (biology/physics) from any recognised institution.2. briefly the facts regarding writ petition no. 3724/1990 are that petitioner in this petition passed secondary examination from board of secondary education, rajasthan, ajmer in the year 1987. photostat copies of marks-sheet and certificate are marked as annexures 1 & 2 respectively. thereafter petitioner passed intermediate examination from the board of high school and intermediate education of u. p. the photostat copies of the marks-sheets and certificate are marked as annexures 3, 4 and 5 respectively. he secured 676 marks out of 1100 which comes to 61.45%. an advertisement was published in daily 'nav-bharat times' dated november 26, 1989 inviting applications for selection of candidates for general nursing course of three years duration. the conditions of eligibility specified in the said advertisement required that a candidate must be intermediate or 10 + 2 with preference to science subject. the petitioner applies for this course and received acknowledgment vide annexure-6. the result was announced on january 19, 1990 and his name did not appear in the list of selected candidates. the last candidate who was selected had secured 59.33% marks.3. in writ petition no. 2966/90 the petitioner passed the secondary examination from the board of secondary education, rajasthan, ajmer in the year, 1987. marks-sheet has been filed as anx. 1. petitioner thereafter passed intermediate examination from the board of high school and intermediate education of u. p. the photostat copies of marks-sheets of intermediate parts-i and ii have been marked as annexures 2 & 3 respectively. he secured 668 marks out of 1100 which comes to 60.72% marks.4. in writ petition no. 4915/90 the petitioner passed secondary examination from the board of secondary.....

Full Judgment

I.S. Israni, J.

1. Since a common question is involved in all the three writ petitions, they are disposed of by one Single order. The short question involved in these writ petitions is as to whether the petitioners, who have completed Higher Secondary Examination could be denied admission' to three years General Nursing Course (Male) only on the ground that they have not passed Higher Secondary Examination with Science (Biology/Physics) from any recognised Institution.

2. Briefly the facts regarding Writ Petition No. 3724/1990 are that petitioner in this petition passed secondary examination from Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Ajmer in the year 1987. Photostat copies of marks-sheet and certificate are marked as Annexures 1 & 2 respectively. Thereafter petitioner passed Intermediate examination from the Board of High School and Intermediate Education of U. P. The photostat copies of the marks-sheets and certificate are marked as Annexures 3, 4 and 5 respectively. He secured 676 marks out of 1100 which comes to 61.45%. An advertisement was published in daily 'Nav-Bharat Times' dated November 26, 1989 inviting applications for selection of candidates for General Nursing Course of three years duration. The conditions of eligibility specified in the said advertisement required that a candidate must be intermediate or 10 + 2 with preference to science subject. The petitioner applies for this course and received acknowledgment vide Annexure-6. The result was announced on January 19, 1990 and his name did not appear in the list of Selected candidates. The last candidate who was selected had secured 59.33% marks.

3. In Writ Petition No. 2966/90 the petitioner passed the secondary examination from the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Ajmer in the year, 1987. Marks-sheet has been filed as Anx. 1. Petitioner thereafter passed Intermediate Examination from the Board of High School and Intermediate Education of U. P. The photostat copies of marks-sheets of Intermediate parts-I and II have been marked as Annexures 2 & 3 respectively. He secured 668 marks out of 1100 which comes to 60.72% marks.

4. In Writ Petition No. 4915/90 the petitioner passed secondary examination from the Board of Secondary Education, Uttar Pradesh in the year 1987. Photostat copy of marks-sheets are filed as Annexures-1 & 2 respectively. Petitioner thereafter passed Intermediate examination from the Board of High School and Intermediate Education of U.P. Photpstat copies of the marks sheets dated 14-7-1988 and 20-6-1989 are filed as Annexures 3 & 4 respectively. He secured 746 marks out of 1100 which comes to 67.81%.

5. It is pointed out by Shri Virendra Lodha & Shri Sanjay Pareek, learned counsel for the petitioners that they have denied admission merely on the ground that these petitioners did not have science subject that is in one case Biology and in another case Physics as subjects in the Intermediate Examination. It is contended by the learned counsel that the course of Intermediate Examination course which have been passed by all petitioners includes Agriculture Botany and Agriculture Engineering which has a topics of Physics also. This shows that these petitioners had studied Biology and Physics both.

6. It is contended by Miss Deepa Ajwani, learned Assistant Government Advocate that in the advertisement it has been specifically mentioned that those candidates who have science subject will be given preference. Apart from that it is pointed out that since these candidates have not passed with science subjects, therefore, they have not been selected.

7. It has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners that their case is squarely covered by two judgments of this Court. Hoti Lal v. State of Rajasthan, (SBCWP No. 1060/89) decided on August 10, 1990 and Iqbal Ahmed v. State of Rajasthan, (SBCWP No. 334/86) decided on April 21, 1986. The matter of Iqbal Ahmed (supra) was decided relying upon the earlier decision of this Court mentioned above.

8. I do not find it necessary to go into the details and adopt or the reasoning since two cases have already been decided. It has been already pointed out that all the above petitioners have passed out Intermediate with Agriculture Botany and Agriculture Engineering which shows that they had science subjects also. It may further be pointed out that in Iqbal Ahmed (supra) the petitioner was a student of Arts. It was held by this Court that the relevant provisions of the Rajasthan Nursing, Midwives, Health Visitors and Auxiliary, Nurses and Midwives Registration Act, 1964 as well as the Regulations framed therein nowhere provide that it will be compulsory to have science subjects before admission is given in this Course, Therefore, in both above intentioned matters it was held by this Court that the petitioners are eligible to be given admission in the above course. Both these orders are squarely apply to these petitioners also.

9. Consequently, all these writ petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed to give admission to the petitioners on payment of necessary fees/charges in the General Nursing Course (Male) which has commenced from February, 1990 -- No order as to costs.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 1991 Same Parties Radheyshyam and ors. vs State Same Subject Constitution Same Judge I.S. Israni, J. Acts & Sections Constitution of India - Article 226; Midwives Registration Ac...

Constitution