AMITA VERMA ADVOCATE Vs. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LAWS(ALL)-2015-4-414
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on April 03,2015

Amita Verma Advocate Appellant
VERSUS
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) HEARD Mr.P.C.Maurya, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr.U.N.Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the selection process of Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Services Examination 2014 ( in short Examination). The petitioner has claimed to be a candidate, who has appeared in the examination. She belongs to Other Backward Classes category. The High Court issued an advertisement for direct recruitment of the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service Officers against the vacancies classified in the different categories. The total 82 vacancies for the direct recruitment of the Higher Judicial Officers had been advertised, out of which, 17 vacancies had been categorized for the Scheduled Caste, 2 vacancies had been categorized for the Scheduled Tribes, 22 vacancies had been categorized for the Other Backward Class and 41 vacancies had been categorized as unreserved vacancies.
(3.) THE petitioner applied against the vacancies advertised. She also appeared in the preliminary examination held on 20.7.2014, in which she was declared successful to appear in the main examination. She appeared in the main examination on 14, 15 and 16 November 2014. The learned counsel for the petitioner has alleged that the examination had started with one hour late without any pre -intimation. She has also stated that in the Law -I Paper (Substantive Law question Paper) 40 Objective questions were introduced without prior notification. Thus, it has been stated that she was neither provided proper time to answer the questions nor were the questions framed in proper manner. In the Law -II Paper (Procedural evidence) the petitioner has alleged the illegality of the same very nature as had alleged in the First Paper. She has also raised the finger over the evaluation of Answer Books as according to the petitioner her answer sheets had not been duly evaluated properly. It has been submitted that the opposite parties firstly declared over all 1818 candidates successful on 14.7.2014. However, after re -evaluation of the answer books again a fresh list of eligible candidates for the main examination had been declared on 21.10.2014.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.