On February 6, 2025, the Rajasthan High Court delivered an important judgment dismissing a petition that challenged the appointment of Padmesh Mishra as the Additional Advocate General (AAG) of Rajasthan
On February 6, 2025, the Rajasthan High Court delivered an important judgment dismissing a petition that challenged the appointment of Padmesh Mishra as the Additional Advocate General (AAG) of Rajasthan. This legal case involved the interpretation of specific provisions in the Rajasthan State Litigation Policy, 2018, and raised questions about the requirements for appointing legal professionals to the position of Additional Advocate General in the state of Rajasthan. The petitioner, Sunil Samdaria, an advocate himself, filed the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging the appointment of Padmesh Mishra based on several grounds, including the contention that Mishra did not meet the requisite experience for the position. The controversy in this case began when Sunil Samdaria, a lawyer, argued that Padmesh Mishra did not satisfy the mandatory 10 years of legal practice requirement, which, according to Clause 14.4 of the Rajasthan State Litigation Policy, was necessary...