ORDER : MUNNURI LAXMAN, J. 1. At the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter has been heard for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 16.07.2025 (Annex.10) rejecting the petitioner’s claim for the award of bonus marks for the experience gained by the petitioner in a similar kind of post for which, the advertisement was issued. 3. By the impugned order, the claim of the petitioner for the award of bonus marks was rejected on the ground that the experience of the post held by petitioner is not similar to the post advertised. 4. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was working as an Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) from 25.07.2014 to 30.11.2022. The eligibility criteria for the said post was ANM/GNM or B.Sc. (Nursing). In the advertisement issued by the respondent, it is also clearly mentioned that the persons who are working in 108 ambulance services and performing similar work to the post which is advertised are also entitled for grant of bonus marks. Petitioner applied for appointment under the OBC category by claiming the required bonus marks, particularly, on the strength of work experience certificate, for the duties similar to the post to that of advertised post. The respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner for grant of bonus marks holding that the certificate of work experience is not similar to that of the post advertised. 5. The case of the respondents, as per their reply filed in the present case, is that the post advertised relates to Female Health Workers in the Medical and Health Department and the qualification for the said post is ANM registered with the Rajasthan Nursing Council. The advertisement in question and the Rule 19 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 1965’) enable the concerned Authority to award the bonus marks based on various criteria including the criteria of working in the similar kind of post to that of advertised post. The advertisement in question and the Rule 19 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 1965’) enable the concerned Authority to award the bonus marks based on various criteria including the criteria of working in the similar kind of post to that of advertised post. According to the respondents, the nature of duties to be performed by the Female Health Workers pertains to pre or post natal care which is not expected to be performed by the persons working in the post of Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) deputed on 108 ambulance emergency services. Therefore, the work experience gained by the employee cannot be said to be equivalent or similar to the work to be performed and to be filled in by the advertised post. Thus, the petitioner is not entitled for the bonus marks. The respondents have tried to justify the rejection of the petitioner’s claim for grant of bonus marks and prayed that the writ petition may be dismissed. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that although the designation of the post may be different, however, all the pre and post natal emergency care is required to be attended to, while the patient is being shifted from various places to the Medical Institutions on emergency basis. The minimum qualification for the said post was ANM and higher post like, GNM or B.Sc. (Nursing) were also made eligible to apply for such post. According to him, the duties required to be performed by the petitioner on 108 ambulance emergency services are almost similar to the post advertised except the duration which may be vary. Therefore, the rejection of the petitioner’s claim for award bonus marks on the basis of work experience is not sustainable. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the duty chart of the duties of a Female Health Worker and the Emergency Medical Technician are entirely different. As per the duty chart of the duties to be performed by the Female Health Workers, required to discharge the work of pre and post natal requirements of the patients in the hospitals, which experience was not gained by the petitioner, while working as EMT on the 108 ambulance emergency services. Therefore, he justified the rejection of the claim of the petitioner. 8. Therefore, he justified the rejection of the claim of the petitioner. 8. To resolve the controversy and to finally settle the dispute between the parties, it is apt to refer to Rule 19 of the Rules of 1965 vis-a-vis the conditions of the advertisement in question which reads hereunder:- “ 19. Scrutiny of applications .- The Commission or the Appointing Authority, as the case may be, shall scrutinize the applications received by them/it and require as many candidates qualified for appointment under these rules as seems to them/it desirable to appear before them/it for interview. Provided that in case of appointment to the post of Pharmacist, merit shall be prepared by the Appointing Authority on the basis of marks obtained in qualifying as specified in the Schedule appended to these rules and such bonus marks as may be specified by the State Government having regard to the length of experience on similar work under the Government, Chief Minister BPL Jeevan Raksha Kosh, National Rural Health Mission, Medi Care Relief Society, AIDS Control Society, Institutes under Co-operative Department [Sahakari Upbhokta Bhandar], Revised National Tuberculosis Control Program (RNTCP), Jhalawar Hospital and Medical College Society, Integrated Disease Surveillance Project or State Institute for Health and Family Welfare. Provided that in case of appointment to the posts other than Pharmacist, which are not in the purview of the Commission, merit shall be prepared by the Appointing Authority on the basis of marks obtained in such qualifying academic examination or professional examination or both as specified in the Schedule appended to these rules and such bonus marks as may be specified by the State Government having regard to the length of experience on similar work under the Government, National Rural Health Mission, Medi Care Relief Society, Chief Minister BPL Jeevan Raksha Kosh, AIDS Control Society, Revised National Tuberculosis Control Program (RNTCP), Jhalawar Hospital and Medical College Society, Integrated Disease Surveillance Project or State Institute for Health and Family Welfare. Provided further that the decision of the Commission or Appointing Authority, as the case may be, as to the eligibility or otherwise of a candidate, shall be final.” **** 8-A. It is also apt to refer to the relevant conditions (English Translation) of the Advertisement which reads as follows:- “1. Provided further that the decision of the Commission or Appointing Authority, as the case may be, as to the eligibility or otherwise of a candidate, shall be final.” **** 8-A. It is also apt to refer to the relevant conditions (English Translation) of the Advertisement which reads as follows:- “1. In accordance with the State Government Order ID-02/Chstwa/Group-3/2023 dated 25.04.2023, service period based bonus marks will be payable to eligible applicants for performing work similar to the advertised post as per rules. 2. In compliance with the Notification of the Department of Personnel dated 23.05.2022 and various decisions passed by the Hon’ble Court, for the above posts, contractual employees working through MRS/Placement Agency/NGO/108/M.M.U./M.A.G.V./ PPP Mode on contract/personal agreement/temporary basis/UTB, performing work similar to the advertised post in the schemes operated in Rajasthan under the Medical Institutions, Medical and Health and Medical Education Department of the Government of Rajasthan, will be given experience based bonus points as above on the basis of the length of service. Employees working in outsourced services are not entitled to the benefit of experience.” 9. The above quoted condition No.2 of the advertisement clearly states that the persons, who have gained experience, while working on a similar kind of post to that for which the advertisement was issued, are also entitled to bonus marks. The maximum bonus marks are 30, i.e. for every one year of service, 10 marks are required to be awarded. This requirement is not in dispute. 10. The only dispute is with regard to the fact that whether the persons, who are working on the post of EMT on 108 ambulance emergency service, are discharging the duties/functions of ANM or not. The minimum qualification for the said post itself indicates that all the duties/functions required to be performed by any person possessing the minimum qualification of ANM are also required to be performed by the employees deputed on the 108 ambulance emergency services. The persons working in hospitals may be required to perform their duties/functions for a longer period than the persons deputed or employed with 108 ambulance emergency services. However, the pre or post natal care to be provided before the regular treatment is given is required to be given in the similar manner whether the same is performed by the regular employees or the persons employed/deputed on 108 ambulance emergency services. 11. However, the pre or post natal care to be provided before the regular treatment is given is required to be given in the similar manner whether the same is performed by the regular employees or the persons employed/deputed on 108 ambulance emergency services. 11. It is not the case of the respondents that any specific posts are available for the persons/employees working on the 108 ambulance emergency services other than post of EMT. 12. The experience certificate issued by the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Barmer clearly shows that the petitioner was working on a similar kind of post which is advertised. In this respect, Column No. 6.2 clearly indicates that the petitioner was discharging the duties/functions similar to the post which is advertised even though she was deputed on 108 ambulance emergency services. 13. Considering the above factual position and the requirements of the conditions of the advertisement, and the relevant provision of Rule 19 of the Rules of 1965, this Court is of the view that the rejection of the petitioner’s claim for award of bonus marks is unsustainable and the same is required to be set aside. 14. In the result, the writ petition is allowed . The impugned rejection order dated 16.07.2025 (Annex.10) is set aside. The respondents are directed to award bonus marks by treating the experience certificate as a valid eligibility certificate for the award of 30 bonus marks according to her entitlement. If the petitioner, after grant of bonus marks, comes within the merit list for consideration for appointment to the post, the respondents shall give the appointment to the petitioner on the vacant post, if available. If no vacant post is available, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment in the next vacancies. The petitioner shall be granted all service benefits except monetary benefits. 15. The said exercise shall be done by the respondents within a period of three months from the date of the receipt of a copy of this order. 16. All the pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.