High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan vs Veena Verma

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2009 Supreme(SC) 1184

R.V.RAVEENDRAN, MARKANDEY KATJU
High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Veena Verma – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
M.R. Calla, Rakesh Dwivedi, M.N. Rao, P.S. Patwalia, Sr. Advs., Manish Singhvi, AAG, Sushil Kumar Jain, Puneet Jain, Ms. Archana Tiwari, Milind Kumar, Anant Prakash, Ankit Dalela, Shantanu Krishna, Rahul Dua, Ms. Mukti Chaudhary, Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, Ananm D.N. Rao, Ms. Neelam Jain, amit Pawan, S.K. Bhattacharya, Ajay Choudhary, Ms. Sandhya Goswami, Ms. Shobha, Aruneshwar Gupta, Surya Kant, Sunil Kumar Jain, Advocates.

Judgement Key Points

Understood. Please provide the legal document content (inside tags or similar) and your specific question or task (e.g., summarize key terms, identify clauses, extract obligations), and I'll analyze it using the specified format with square bracket references like (!) .

JUDGMENT

Markandey Katju, J.—

C.A. Nos. 5699/2000, 5702/2000 & 5700/2000

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 calculati

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2009 Supreme(SC) 1184

R.V.RAVEENDRAN, MARKANDEY KATJUHigh Court of Judicature for Rajasthan – AppellantVersusVeena Verma – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

R.V.RAVEENDRAN, MARKANDEY KATJU
High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Veena Verma – Respondent