Jodhpur: The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that candidates who have worked in a government hospital on a government-sanctioned post cannot be denied the benefit of experience-based bonus marks in recruitment merely because their salary was paid through a trust or NGO instead of directly by the State Government.
The State Government had argued that the petitioners were not entitled to bonus marks in the Nursing Officer Recruitment-2023 because their salaries were paid by a charitable trust and not directly from the government treasury.
The High Court rejected this argument, holding that the source of salary is less important than the actual experience gained while working in a government health institution.
Justice Dr. Nupur Bhati delivered the judgment while hearing petitions filed by candidates whose candidature had been cancelled.
The Court quashed the cancellation orders and directed the State Government to award them bonus marks based on their work experience. If, after adding the bonus marks, they qualify on merit and satisfy all other eligibility conditions, they must be considered for appointment within eight weeks.
The dispute arose after the petitioners applied for the Nursing Officer Recruitment-2023. They participated in the selection process, completed document verification, and scored above the cut-off marks in the provisional merit list.
However, before the final merit list was published, their experience certificates were rejected. By an order dated 24 July 2025, their candidature was cancelled on the ground that they had not received their salary directly from the State Government.
The petitioners argued that they had been working since October 2019 at Smt. Mohini Devi Jugraj Hingad Government Community Health Centre, Ghanerao, Pali, on government-approved posts. The hospital was being run under a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model.
They contended that their appointments had been approved by the government, they had served in the government hospital even during the COVID-19 pandemic, and merely receiving their salary through a charitable trust could not erase their work experience.
The High Court agreed with the petitioners. It observed that the purpose of granting bonus marks is to reward candidates who have acquired practical experience by serving in government health institutions.
Since it was undisputed that the petitioners had actually worked in a government community health centre on government-sanctioned posts, their experience could not be ignored simply because the salary was routed through a trust or NGO.
The Court further clarified that if, under an administrative arrangement approved by the government, salary is paid through a trust or charitable organisation, it does not reduce the value of the experience gained in a government hospital. The real consideration is whether the candidate actually worked in the government institution, not who transferred the salary.
The Court also relied on its earlier decision in the Govind Dayma v. State of Rajasthan case.
In that case, laboratory technicians were denied bonus marks because their salaries were paid through an NGO. The High Court had ruled in their favour, and the State’s appeal was later dismissed. The Court held that although the present case involved nursing staff working in a PPP-operated hospital, the legal issue was identical.
According to the Court, the source of salary would become relevant only if there was doubt about whether the candidate had actually worked in the government hospital.
Where there is no dispute regarding the candidate’s service and experience, bonus marks cannot be denied merely because the salary came through a trust or NGO. Doing so would defeat the very purpose of the recruitment rules.
Accordingly, the High Court set aside the order dated 24 July 2025 cancelling the petitioners’ candidature. It directed the authorities to grant them bonus marks for their work experience, prepare the merit list afresh, and appoint them as Nursing Officers/Nursing Staff within eight weeks if they qualify after the bonus marks are added.
The ruling is significant beyond this particular recruitment. It establishes that employees working on government-approved posts in government hospitals cannot be deprived of recruitment benefits solely because their salaries were paid through an NGO, trust, or PPP arrangement.
The judgment reinforces that actual work experience in a government health institution—not the mode of salary payment—is the key factor for awarding experience-based bonus marks.