[2026:RJ-JP:20763] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16728/2025 1. Vice Chancellor, Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya Shekhawati University, Katrathal, Tehsil And District Sikar (Raj.) 2. Controller Of Examination (Registrar), Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya Shekhawati University, Katrathal, Tehsil And District Sikar (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus Narendra S/o Gopallal, R/o Village Lamiya, Via Khatushyamji, Tehsil Dantaramgarh, District Sikar (Raj.) ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Mehla Ms. Sunita Mehla For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vinay Mathur HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 18/05/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the limited issue agitated before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat (for short, ‘PLA’) pertained to the revaluation of two examination papers. It is submitted that the learned PLA, vide the impugned order, had directed the said revaluation to be conducted by a duly constituted Committee, strictly in accordance with the law. 2. Learned counsel further submit that in compliance with the aforesaid directions passed by the learned PLA, the requisite revaluation was carried out, and status quo was directed to be maintain. [2026:RJ-JP:20763] (2 of 2) [CW-16728/2025] 3. It is next submitted that despite the direction to maintain the status quo, the respondent has cleared the final year examinations and wrongfully obtained a degree. 4. Having heard the preliminary submissions advanced and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court notes that since the directions passed by the learned PLA qua revaluation have already been complied with, and therefore, the challenge to the impugned order is not maintainable. 5. Moreover, this Court observes that the subsequent allegation qua the conferment of the degree by the respondent falls outside the circumscribed scope of the present writ petition. The said factual development constitutes an independent cause of action; it neither arises from nor forms the basis of the impugned order passed by the learned PLA. 6. In view of the aforesaid observations, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the learned PLA. 7. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to take appropriate recourse qua their grievances, if they so choose, strictly in accordance with the law. 8. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J Pooja /13