JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) These appeals are directed against the judgment & order of the
Rajasthan High Court dated 30.4.1999 in D.B. Special Civil Appeal No.
410/1998. CA No. 5699/2000 is filed by the High Court of Rajasthan, C.A.
No.5702/2000 is by State of Rajasthan and C.A. No. 5700 is by a promotee
Judicial Officer.
(2.) An advertisement dated 31.10.1994 was published by the High Court
inviting applications for being considered for appointment in the RHJS
against 7 vacancies including the two vacancies reserved for candidates
belonging to Scheduled Castes and one vacancy for a candidate belonging
to Scheduled Tribe. It was also stipulated in the advertisement that the
number of posts could be increased.
(3.) Civil Writ Petition No. 4580/1996 was filed in the Rajasthan High
Court by Ms. Veena Verma, (first respondent in CA No. 5699/2000) an
Advocate practicing in Ajmer, who was a candidate for direct recruitment in
the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service ('RHJS' for short). She stood 8th in
the merit list of the selection. In her petition she claimed that she was
entitled to be declared selected and appointed as on a correct calculation,
the vacancies for direct recruitment in the RHJS in accordance with the
applicable rules came to 10 and not 7, and the petitioner being the 8 th
selected candidate was entitled to appointment against the post. The learned
Single Judge dismissed the petition by judgment dated 30.3.1998. But by
the impugned judgment dated 30.4.1999, the Division Bench of the High
Court has set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the High
Court and directed the High Court to determine the number of vacancies as
on 31.10.1994, and if the vacancies were more than seven, then consider
Veena Verma for the post in RHJS.
CA No. 5701/2000;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.