A WRIT PETITION IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR WANT OF NON-JOINDER OF NECESSARY PARTY.

JUDGMENT

Mohammad Rafiq, J. - This appeal has been preferred by appellant-University of Rajasthan against the judgement of the learned Single Judge dated 3.1.2019 by which the writ petition, filed by respondent-Dr. Ujala Nyola, has been allowed with direction to the appellants to re-assess her merit at the interview held on 10.10.2013, for the post of Assistant Professor (Botany), pursuant to the advertisement dated 1.11.2012 by adding thereto 0.38 (point thirty eight) marks on account of appropriate weightage for Secondary School Examination of 60% and further 1(one) mark for research performance on account of one research paper published in a recognised journal. It was further directed that on such re-assessment, if the petitioner falls in merit higher than those already appointed to the post of Assistant Professor (Botany), she be given appointment on the post of Assistant Professor (Botany) in OBC-NCL category by creating a supernumerary post along with all notional benefits. Compliance of the judgement was ordered to be made within a period of four weeks from the date of presentation of certified copy of the order before the appellant-university.

2. The facts of the case are that the appellants issued an advertisement on 1.11.2012 inviting applications from the eligible candidates for appointment against 294 posts of the Assistant Professor in different 42 subjects including 8 posts in the subject of Botany. The interviews were held on 10.10.2013. Appointments were made at the end of the year. The respondent-writ petitioner filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2694/2014 alleging irregularities committed by the Selection Committee in the selection process. It was alleged that candidates though mentioned publication of the research papers in the application form, but could not produce them before the Selection Committee on any day before the last date of application form, yet they were awarded marks therefor. Moreover, only 1.5 marks have been awarded to the respondentwrit petitioner for secondary school examination with 60%, whereas in the same process of selection pursuant to same advertisement, 1.86 marks were awarded to all those falling in the higher bracket of 60%-70%. The learned Single Judge of this Court by judgement dated 4.11.2015 disposed of the writ petition with the observation that the allegations made by the writ petitioner required a probe and therefore a Committee be constituted to examine them. Respondent-writ petitioner was required to make a detailed representation to the Vice Chancellor of the appellant-University within 15 days, duly supported by the documents and the Vice Chancellor of the University was required to constitute a Committee in his discretion. It was directed that the Committee shall be given a time limit, not exceeding three months, within which it would submit its report. The Vice Chancellor after receipt of the report would take an appropriate action to ensure fairness and transparency of the selection to meet the ends of justice. The required exercise would be completed within six months. Petitioner accordingly submitted a detailed representation on 23.11.2015. The Vice Chancellor accordingly constituted a Committee headed by Professor P.R. Sharma, the Dean Faculty of Science, which submitted its report on 27.01.2016. The Vice Chancellor, upon consideration of the report, finally by order dated 22.3.2016 rejected the representation primarily on two grounds; firstly that as per the report of the Committee 1.5 weightage had been given to all those candidates having 60% marks in the secondary school examination in the subject of Botany, therefore, no discrimination has been practised against the respondent and secondly that she did not submit her research papers along with the application upto the last date of submission of application form and mentioned "Nil" in her own hand writing in the relevant column of asking about research papers, in the application form.

3. We have heard Shri N.K. M