[2025:RJ-JP:13448] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5263/2016 Archana Mangal D/o Niranjan Lal W/o Lokesh Kumar Gupta, C/o Chandra Prakash Gupta, Moti Nagar, Near Usha Mandir, Bhittarbari, Bayana, Bharatpur Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer Through Its Secretary 2. The State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary, Secondary Education, Department Of Education, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretrait,jaipur 3. The Director, Secondary Education, Directorate, Bikaner ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akshit Gupta For Respondent(s) : Ms. Namita Parihar, Dy.GC Mr. Nitin jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 25/03/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has applied for the post of lecturer (Sanskrit) in pursuance to the advertisement- 2013. It is further submitted that respondents declared the result for the said post, wherein, name of the petitioner was not reflected in the final merit list. 2. Further, it is submitted that respondent- RPSC issued a reserve list on 10.08.2015, wherein, name of the petitioner was reflected at Serial No. R-10, therefore, petitioner has prayed that the said reserve list should be made operative for the unfilled seats. [2025:RJ-JP:13448] (2 of 3) [CW-5263/2016] 3. Heard and considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, upon perusal of the records and reply filed by the respondent- RPSC, this Court has made the following observation:- 3.1 That recruitment in question pertains to the year 2013, and the present petition is filed in the year 2016. 3.2. That the name of the petitioner was not included in the final merit list dated 18.03.2015, howsoever, her name was included in the reserved list based on the merit scored by the petitioner. 3.3. That as per Rule 20 of the Rajasthan Education Service Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred as ‘Rules of 1970’), candidates whose name are included in the reserve list have no vested rights to seek appointment. 3.4. That reserve list remains operative only up to six months, from the date on which the original list was forwarded. 3.5. That no interim order is operational in favor of the petitioner. 3.6. That subsequent recruitment is already carried out and no as on date, no seats are lying vacant vacancies vis-a-vis the impugned selection process. 4. This Court deems it apposite to place reliance upon the ratio encapsulated in State of Orissa & Anr. v. Raj Kishore Nanda & Ors. reported in (2010) 6 SCC 777, Girdhar Kumar Dadhich Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in (2009) 2 SCC 706, Union of India v. B. Valluvan reported in (2006) 8 SCC 686 and Raj Rishi Mehra & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in (2013) 12 SCC 243, and the circulars issued by the Government of Rajasthan, Department of Personnel dated 19.07.2001 bearing No. F.7(2)/DOP/A-2/81 Pt. and Øekad i-7 ¼2½ dkfeZd@d&2@81 [2025:RJ-JP:13448] (3 of 3) [CW-5263/2016] ikVZ dated 13.01.2016 passed by jktLFkku ljdkj dkfeZd ¼d&2½ foHkkx, whereby it is made unambiguous that qua the selection process for any public service examination, the waiting/reserved list lapses after a span of six months from the date of its issuance, and if appointments are already made, then no judicial interference can be made at a belated stage. 5. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J DIKSHA MISHRA /266