Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 533 (JHR)

Manoj Kumar v. State Of Jharkhand

2002-04-30

M.Y.EQBAL

body2002
ORDER M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. Heard the counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order as contained in memo No. 814 dated 17.2.2001 issued by respondent No. 2. the Superintendent of Police, Ranchi whereby the appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled. 3. Petitioners case is that pursuant to an advertisement No. 1/98 he applied for appointment on the post of constable. The petitioner was sent for training and after completing successful training he was posted in the District Armed Force vide letter dated 3.8.2000. However, all on a sudden the petitioner was discharged from service by the impugned letter on the ground that on remeasurement the height of the petitioner was found to be 179.8 cm. It is contended by the petitioner that the minimum height laid down for appointment to the post of constable is 165 cm. 4. The respondents, in the counter affidavit, have stated that the petitioner was temporarily appointed on the basis of the recommendations made by the Chairman, Constable Selection Committee subject to verification of documents submitted by them. It is stated that on the basis of observation made in the case filed by one Shivlal Yadav being CWJC No. 3053/2000R said Shivlal Yadav filed a representation before the D.I.G. Ranchi which was considered and measurement was taken of those candidates including the petitioner. In course of measurement the height of the petitioner was found to be 179.8 cms. whereas in Master Chart his height was mentioned as 183 cm. Accordingly a report was sent by the D.I.G. Ranchi to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi for taking suitable action and, as such, the petitioner was removed from service. 5. From the facts stated in the counter affidavit it is clear that the petitioner was appointed on the basis of the recommendations of the Chairman, Constable Selection Committee in 1999. after training the petitioner was sent for training and after completion of training he continued in the said employment. It is also clear that on the basis of the observation made by this court in another case being CWJC No. 3053/2000R filed by one Shivlal Yadav, the petitioner was removed from service. after training the petitioner was sent for training and after completion of training he continued in the said employment. It is also clear that on the basis of the observation made by this court in another case being CWJC No. 3053/2000R filed by one Shivlal Yadav, the petitioner was removed from service. Para 13 of the counter affidavit is worth to be quoted which reads as under :-- "That so far paras 11 and 12 of the present writ application is concerned, I say that one Shivlal Yadav preferred CWJC No. 3053/2000R before the Honble Court which was disposed of with the following directions" In the facts and circumstances, while I do not choose to give any specific decision on one or two way, give liberty to the petitioner to move before the DIG, Chotanagpur, Range. If the petitioner files any representation showing the names of the person belonging to same category, having lesser height have been appointed, the DIG will find out as to whether the petitioner has been declared successful and persons having lesser height have been appointed or not. If any person belonging to the same category of the petitioner having lessor height has been appointed, he will pass appropriate order in respect of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such representation. If any adverse decision is taken he will communicate the same to the petitioner within the aforesaid period. In the light of the aforesaid order the said Shivlal Yadav filed representation before the DIG, Ranchi which was considered accordingly and remeasurement was taken of those candidates including the petitioner also. In course of which the height of the petitioner was found 179.8 cm. whereas in Master Chart his height was mentioned as 183 cm. It is pertinent to note here that the minimum height of the candidates selected in this category was 182 cm. as such a report was sent by the DIG, Ranchi in this regard vide Memo No. 21 dated 10.1.2001 and the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi was also directed vide Memo No. 145 dated 24.1.2001 that since the petitioner has been appointed on purely temporary basis, suitable action may be taken against him for the irregular appointment. As such the petitioner was removed from service vide District order contained in Memo No. 145 dated 24.1.2001 and Memo No.21 dated 10.1.2001." 6. As such the petitioner was removed from service vide District order contained in Memo No. 145 dated 24.1.2001 and Memo No.21 dated 10.1.2001." 6. Admittedly the height of the petitioner was more than the height prescribed in the advertisement and he was given employment on the basis of the recommendations of the Selection committee and he continued in the said employment for several months. The removal of the petitioner from service without giving any show cause notice and without opportunity of hearing is, in my opinion, wholly unjustified. It is not a case where the petitioner was merely called for selection and at the time of verification of records his height was found less than the height mentioned in the physical test chart, rather, it is a case where, after appointment the petitioner was sent for training and he continuously worked for several months and. thereafter, he was removed from service without giving any show cause notice and opportunity of hearing. 7. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ application is allowed and the impugned order of removal of the petitioner from service is quashed. The petitioner shall be reinstated in service with all monetary benefits.