INTRODUCTION
The Rajasthan High Court made a decisive ruling which specifically separated internship from employment through a dismissal of bonus marks requested by General Nursing and Midwifery (GNM) students for the Nursing Officer recruitment process due to their COVID-19 pandemic service. According to the Court, an internship inseparably belongs to the diploma curriculum framework so it fails to match government employment or contractual service’s definition.
BACKGROUND
Pritika Gahlot & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.
The Rajasthan government experienced a severe deficit in medical professionals at the moment COVID-19 reached its highest point. GNM students who were enrolled in their coursework but not interned were deployed by the authorities to assist Community Health Assistants (CHAs) in their contracted positions to manage the healthcare crisis. The students engaged in population-based health assessments while carrying out pharmaceutical product serve distribution.
The Rajasthan government started offering bonus marks in their Nursing Officer recruitment advertisement to CHAs who participated in pandemic medical services. A policy change was introduced according to court guidelines that appeared in former litigation between CHAs.
During the pandemic all GNM students participated in duties similar to those of CHAs thus they sought High Court recognition for bonus marks because their job responsibilities matched CHAs.
KEY POINTS
- Internship Is Not Employment
According to the Court’s decision internship fulfills necessary academic requirements of the diploma course in GNM rather than constituting contractual or temporary work.
The Court observed:
“On a pointed query to the counsel for the petitioners as to whether the diploma can be awarded without completion of the internship, the answer is in negative. Being so, it thus emerges that internship is an integral part of the academic curriculum for the diploma in question and the same cannot therefore be termed as an employment but rather is continuation of the studenthood.”
- No Entitlement to Bonus Marks Without Employment Status
Loss of eligibility occurred because petitioners had both signed no agreements and received no temporary assignments making them ineligible to receive bonus marks according to the recruitment policies’ specifications.
- Lack of Required Qualification at Relevant Time
According to court findings GNM students failed to possess both proper qualification along with the required registration status with the Rajasthan Nursing Council at the relevant moment. CHA employees received GNM as their qualification while acquiring formal contract appointments.
- The petitioners do not satisfy requirements defined by the Office Order dated 25.04.2023
The bonus marks eligibility criteria from the mentioned order prove that petitioners did not fulfill necessary requirements.
The Court noted that:
“The petitioners were neither engaged on a contract basis nor on a temporary basis, and therefore, do not fall under the definition of ‘Karmik,’ who are entitled to receive bonus marks.”
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
The authorities did not accept the request for bonus marks from GNM students prompting students to submit a fresh petition. At the court proceedings the petitioners argued their essential COVID-19 tasks required no discrimination about their non-formalized position.
The petitions filed at the High Court received rejection because the court determined academic internship did not fit within existing legal employment-based policy benefits. The court stressed that educational training participants need differentiated treatment from Trainees and then Professionally Qualified Staff who receive formal appointments.
CONCLUSION
Academic requirements and government employment status have distinct boundaries according to the Rajasthan High Court when it comes to bonus mark eligibility in recruitment processes. The Court acknowledged that internships had a mandatory academic role which led it to maintain the policy system for pandemic bonus payments to front-line contractual workers.
This ruling establishes that policy benefits which stem from national emergency service need to follow established legal requirements and qualification standards instead of depending on similarity of performed work.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY RIMPLEPREET KAUR
