JUDGMENT 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to forward the application form of the petitioner for award of bonus marks while serving in rural area. The petitioner further seeks a declaration that service rendered by him at Community Health Centre (hereinafter as 'the CHC') Kaila Devi and CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji may be treated as a rural service and accordingly the petitioner be granted 10% bonus marks as per notification dated 18.05.2022. 2. Learned counsel-Mr. Amit Jindal appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner initially came to be appointed as Medical Officer by an order dated 17.12.2020 and he was given posting at CHC Kailadevi, District Karauli. The petitioner joined at the aforesaid post on 23.12.2020. The respondents issued an order on 14.08.2021, whereby the petitioner was transferred to CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji, District Karauli on account of adjustment of some other person. The petitioner submitted his joining at CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji and started working there. 3. Learned counsel submitted that the respondents issued a notification dated 28.06.2021, whereby different Remote Difficult & Rural Areas were notified and certain Community Health Centres and Primary Health Centres were removed from such list. 4. Learned counsel submitted that in the meanwhile, the respondents conducted the NEET PG Examination and since the petitioner was eligible to participate in the said exam, he filled the requisite application form and appeared in the examination on due date. 5. Learned counsel submitted that on declaration of result of NEET PG 2022, the petitioner secured 525 marks out of total 800 marks. 6. Learned counsel submitted that the respondents issued a notification on 18.05.2022, in compliance of the order passed by the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Amit Bagra v. State of Rajasthan and Ors., whereby medical institutes, PHC & CHC were added in the list of remote/difficult/rural area. 7. Learned counsel submitted that name of CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji was mentioned at Serial No.10 in the second list by which name was amended and it was mentioned that now CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji will be known as PHC Gadmora. 8. 7. Learned counsel submitted that name of CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji was mentioned at Serial No.10 in the second list by which name was amended and it was mentioned that now CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji will be known as PHC Gadmora. 8. Learned counsel submitted that an application was filed by the petitioner for award of bonus marks as he had worked at CHC, Kaila Devi and CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji, and the Controlling Officer of the petitioner has forwarded his application, which has been filed as Annexures 6 & 7 with the writ petition. 9. Learned counsel submitted that in spite of submitting application by the petitioner, his case was not forwarded to the Competent Authority because of the fact that he has not completed more than one year of service in the rural area. 10. Learned counsel further submitted that final notification dated 18.05.2022, was issued by the respondents, whereby three different tables were provided in the said notification. 11. Learned counsel submitted that the first table was in respect of those Medical Institutions which were added in Remote/Difficult/Rural category. The second table belongs to those Medical Institutions, whose name were changed and in the said table, name of CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji was mentioned as changed to PHC Gadmora. 12. Learned counsel submitted that the third table was in respect of those Medical Institutions whose names were removed from the list of Remote/Difficult/Rural area wherein the name of CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji was not included and as such, the State Authorities were considering CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji in rural area. 13. Learned counsel submitted that the respondents in spite of issuance of final Notification dated 18.05.2022, did not take into account the services rendered by the petitioner in rural area and as such, they have illegally deprived the petitioner for grant of bonus marks of 10%, whereas he has rendered services in rural area from 14.08.2021 to 13.08.2022. 14. Learned counsel submitted that the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner for awarding him bonus marks only on the premise that the name of the place where the petitioner was working i.e. CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji was later on changed as PHC Gadmora. 15. 14. Learned counsel submitted that the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner for awarding him bonus marks only on the premise that the name of the place where the petitioner was working i.e. CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji was later on changed as PHC Gadmora. 15. Learned counsel submitted that once the final Notification dated 18.05.2022, did not delete the name of Shri Mahaveer Ji from the list of the rural area, the respondents could not have denied benefit to the petitioner for award of bonus marks. 16. Learned counsel further submitted that the respondents though have filed reply to the writ petition and stated that Shri Mahaveer Ji was converted into Tehsil by the Notification dated 28.06.2021, however, the conversion of the place i.e. Shri Mahaveer Ji from Sub-Tehsil to Tehsil by notification dated 28.06.2021, will not deprive the petitioner from award of bonus marks, as the final Notification did not reflect Shri Mahaveer Ji, as a place not falling in the rural area. 17. Learned counsel further submitted that the respondents also cannot deny benefit of rural service to the petitioner on account of not getting the rural allowance, as the petitioner during the probation period was not paid rural allowance, however, his services in rural area is required to be taken into account for the purpose of award of bonus marks. 18. Learned counsel submitted that the issue relating to issuance of final Notification dated 18.05.2022, has already been considered by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10023/2022 (Dr. Navita Kumawat v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.). Learned counsel, on the strength of the said judgment submitted that even if there is some administrative lapse on the part of the respondents by not mentioning the correct details in the final notification of Rural/Difficult/Remote area, the same cannot result into any prejudice to a candidate for getting the benefit of bonus marks. 19. Learned counsel-Mr. Harshal Tholia appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner is not entitled for award of any bonus marks. 20. Learned counsel submitted that the requisite information was sought by the Director, Medical & Health Service from different Controlling Officers in respect of the places, where Rural/Difficult/Remote areas were to be provided for award of bonus marks. 21. Learned counsel-Mr. Harshal Tholia appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner is not entitled for award of any bonus marks. 20. Learned counsel submitted that the requisite information was sought by the Director, Medical & Health Service from different Controlling Officers in respect of the places, where Rural/Difficult/Remote areas were to be provided for award of bonus marks. 21. Learned counsel submitted that in pursuance of the Notification dated 14.04.2020, issued by the State Government, the relevant information was sought from CMHO the Karauli and the, CMHO Karauli had sent the information to the Controlling Officer suggesting to substitute the Community Health Centre Shri Mahaveer Ji to Primary Health Centre, Gadmora. 22. Learned counsel submitted that the respondents, if on account of some mistake, could not correct the final Notification dt.18.05.2022, the same may not result into giving any benefit to the petitioner and if any mistake has been committed at administrative level, the Authorities are always free to take appropriate action against such erring official. 23. Learned counsel submitted that on account of inadvertent mistake committed by any official, no substantial right can be claimed by the petitioner for grant of bonus marks. 24. Learned counsel further submitted that the decision to convert sub-Tehsil Mahaveer Ji, District Karauli into Tehsil Mahaveer Ji, District Karauli was taken way back in June, 2021 and if due to any administrative lapse, the order could not be amended in final Notification, the same should not result into giving any benefit to the petitioner. 25. Learned counsel further submitted that as far as CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji in District Karauli is concerned, there are no two different PHC at Gadmora and only name has been changed and the fact remains that now CHC Mahaveer Ji is in urban area and as such, the petitioner only by changing of name of CHC Mahaveer Ji to PHC Gadmora cannot get the benefit of bonus marks and it is the actual experience of service rendered in the rural area which makes the person entitled for grant of bonus mark and if petitioner is working in CHC Mahaveer Ji which is removed from the list of rural area, the benefit cannot be extended to him. 26. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that as far as reliance on the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Dr. 26. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that as far as reliance on the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Dr. Navita Kumawat v. State of Rajasthan & Ors (supra) is concerned, the same has no relevance in the present facts of the case. Learned counsel submitted that this Court in the case of Dr. Navita Kumawat v. State of Rajasthan & Ors (supra) has not considered the issue of change of name of Community Health Centre and as such, no benefit can be given to the petitioner. 27. I have heard the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 28. This Court finds that working of the petitioner in rural area is by virtue of his posting in the rural area and as such, the respondents while passing the order of posting of the petitioner, posted him initially at CHC Kaila Devi and later on by an order dated 14.08.2021, the petitioner came to be posted at CHC Mahaveer Ji. 29. This Court finds that as far as CHC Mahaveer Ji is concerned, the same has not been removed from the list of rural areas as was defined in the first Notification dated 14.04.2020 issued by the respondents where complete list was given of different places where benefit was to be accorded to the persons who are working in rural areas. The bare perusal of notification dated 14.04.2020 shows Community Health Centre Shri Mahaveer Ji at Serial No.160. The respondents while issuing subsequent notifications have also kept in mind the initial Notification dated 14.04.2020 and from time to time they issued different notifications of deleting/including different places in the list of Community Health Centres, whereby people are held entitled for grant of bonus marks. 30. This Court finds little substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents that on account of inadvertent mistake committed on behalf of the respondents, of not notifying the name of CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji & deleting the said place from the list published on 14.05.2020 and in the subsequent notifications, as such, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of the benefit of bonus marks, this argument is noted to be rejected. Once the final Notification dated 18.05.2022 was issued by the State Government, it was incumbent on the State Authorities to take care of the places against which the in-service Doctors, were entitled for grant of bonus marks. 31. The submission of learned counsel for the respondents that no substantial right is created in favour of the petitioner as the inadvertent mistake made by the erring Official would not result into giving any valuable right in favour of the petitioner, this Court finds that the State Authorities if had taken a decision earlier to convert Shri Mahaveer Ji from sub-Tehsil to Tehsil way back in June, 2021, the necessary follow up action should have been taken and accordingly, the place i.e. Shri Mahaveer Ji, if falls in Tehsil area, such place should have been omitted from the list of the places, where benefit of bonus marks was to be given. 32. The submission of learned counsel for the respondents that since the petitioner has not been granted rural allowance and notification was issued by the Department of Personnel dated 28.04.2017, whereby the rural area was defined as a place other than Tehsil Headquarter and which was not a municipal town, there is no dispute on the legal position of law that a person who is posted in rural area is required to be paid the rural allowance. 33. This Court finds that the probationers who are posted in rural area are not getting rural allowance and as such, if the petitioner was posted during his probation period in the rural area, the State Government cannot be permitted to take the stand that since the petitioner was not paid the rural allowance, he will not get the benefit desired by him. 34. This Court had an occasion to deal with the issue of the Notification dated 18.05.2022, issued by the State Government for award of bonus marks to the different in-service candidates. This Court in the case of Dr. Navita Kumawat v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (supra) has already held that the Authorities had to take due care in publishing the Notification and if any mistake is committed by the respondents, then the same should not result into depriving the candidate from getting the benefit. 35. This Court in the case of Dr. Navita Kumawat v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (supra) has already held that the Authorities had to take due care in publishing the Notification and if any mistake is committed by the respondents, then the same should not result into depriving the candidate from getting the benefit. 35. This Court finds that the respondents have acted in an arbitrary manner in depriving the petitioner from getting the bonus marks for rendering services in rural area. 36. Accordingly, this Court allows the present writ petition and the respondents are directed to take into account the rural service rendered by the petitioner at CHC Shri Mahaveer Ji from 14.08.2021 till 30.04.2022. The necessary and appropriate orders may be issued by the respondents within a period of two days, as the second round of counselling is going to be started very shortly. 37. However, it is made clear that the petitioner on account of passing of the present order, will only be permitted to participate in the second round of counselling.