[2025:RJ-JP:30955-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1024/2023 1. Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner, District Jaipur, Through Its Vice Chancellor. 2. Registrar, Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner, District- Jaipur. ----Appellants Versus Dr. Priyanka Joshi D/o Shri Prem Chand Joshi, Aged About 44 Years, R/o House No. J-6, Udai Park, Sector-5, Hiran Magri, Udaipur, Presently Residing At C/o Shri Kuldeep Ji Bagherwal, R/o 21, Jawahar Nagar Colony, Near Glass Factory, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302015. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.A. Katta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rohit Tiwari with Mr. Pushpendra Singh Tanwar for Mr. Shobhit Tiwari HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 11/08/2025 On 05.09.2024, this Court has passed the following order:- “Heard on prayer for stay. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that even though the respondent may have right to be considered as a reserve or wait list candidate, there is no inherent or vested right to be appointed. He would next submit that as the validity of the reserve list had expired after nine months, no direction could be issued in the writ petition. Lastly he would submit that the learned Single Judge has granted consequential benefits, whereas, the respondent [2025:RJ-JP:30955-DB] (2 of 3) [SAW-1024/2023] had already worked and she was paid Rs.500/- in some other University as a guest faculty and, therefore, actual monetary benefit could not be granted as part of consequential benefit. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, would submit that the applicable Rules mandate preparation of reserve list and the candidate Ragini Ranawat, who was appointed (2 of 2) [SAW-1024/2023] vide order dated 30.06.2018 failed to join till 11.08.2018 and vacancy arose, therefore, the respondent-writ petitioner was entitled to be offered appointment. The writ petition was filed before expiry of the validity of the reserve list and by interim order also that was continued. Lastly, he would submit that the respondent is not claiming any actual monetary, benefit but at this stage, the notional benefits and seniority may be allowed. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the relevant Rules under which reserve list remained valid for nine months and that the candidate, who was appointed, failed to join and the vacancy arose before expiry of period of nine months and the writ petition was also filed before expiry of the validity of the period of reserve list, we are not inclined to stay the order of learned Single Judge. However, to dispel any confusion on the consequential part of the order, we only say that the appellants shall allow the notional benefit and seniority to the respondent writ-petitioner. Issue of actual monetary benefits does not arise. Stay application stands disposed off. Learned counsel for the appellants fairly submits that he would be advising the appellants to take necessary steps in view of the order which has now been passed. The aforesaid fact may be [2025:RJ-JP:30955-DB] (3 of 3) [SAW-1024/2023] brought to the notice of the Court dealing with contempt. List the appeal after four weeks.” In compliance of the aforesaid order passed by this Court, the appointment order dated 26.03.2025 has been issued in favour of the respondent-writ petitioner and she has joined pursuant thereto. In that view of the matter, nothing survives in the present appeal and the same stands disposed of. However, the respondent-writ petitioner is at liberty to avail remedy available to her under the law if any grievance still survives. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J PAYAL DHAWAN /70