JUDGMENT I. M. QUDDUSI, J. — This writ petition has been filed by the Director General and Inspector General of Police, Orissa, Cuttack, against the impugned judgment/order dated 20.6.2006 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar, in O.A. No.692 of 2006, directing him to take steps for appointment of the instant opposite party on the post of Sub-Inspector of Police on the ground that Tribunal has no jurisdiction to condone the deficiency in physical test. 2. The brief facts of the case are that an advertisement was made in the year 1992 for filling up some post of Sub-Inspector of Police. The conditions in the year 1992 given in the said advertisement were as under : “1. Candidate should be within the age group of 20 to 25 years as on 1.1.1993; 2. The physical standard for general candidate would be Height 168 Cm., Chest Expanded-84 Cm., Chest un-expanded 79 Cm., Weight-55 Kg; and 3. A certificate of health from the C.D.M.O. of the dis¬trict, in P.M. Form No.103 will have to be produced by the candi¬dates who will qualify in the written test.” 3. The physical test had been fixed at running 1 mile in 8 minutes, cycling 1 mile in 5 minutes, low hurdles in 2'.6" height 110 meters in 25 seconds, Broad Jump of 12'. Besides these condi¬tions, norms for written test, physiology test and viva-voce test was also prescribed. 4. Selection Committee fixed 150 marks for written test and 100 marks for viva-voce test. Accordingly, candidates were allowed to appear in the physical test and after being success¬ful in physical test and physical standard, they were allowed to appear in the written test and viva-voce test. 5. The instant opposite party had also participated in the selection. It is not disputed that the opposite party had quali¬fied in the physical test according to the norms fixed and ap¬peared in the written test and thereafter viva-voce test. But his name did not find place in the selection list. 6. Thereafter a batch of Original Applications leading case of which is O.A. No.2798(C) of 1994 was filed before the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack challeng¬ing the selection process, specially fixing the viva-voce test mark at 100. But his name did not find place in the selection list. 6. Thereafter a batch of Original Applications leading case of which is O.A. No.2798(C) of 1994 was filed before the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack challeng¬ing the selection process, specially fixing the viva-voce test mark at 100. The Tribunal disposed of the Original Applications vide judgment/order dated 3.11.1996 holding that fixation of 100 marks for viva-voce test for selection for the year 1992-93 was not justified and it set aside only the marks awarded in the viva-voce test and directed to reduce the viva-voce test mark from 100 to 20 and to calculate the marks awarded by the Selec¬tion Committee by dividing it by 5 and to prepare a fresh selec¬tion list taking into consideration the revised marks obtained in the viva-voce and written tests. 7. Further the Tribunal directed that if the applicants were found to be in higher position in the merit list, then the candidates already selected are to be called for physical test afresh inasmuch as with passage of time there might have been changed circumstances to make them ineligible for police force. Thereafter, a few selected candidates moved this Court against the order of the Tribunal by filing O.J.C. No.173 of 1998 and on 3.2.2005, this Court, while disposing of the writ petition, confirmed the judgment of the Tribunal with a direction to the authorities to consider the cases of all the candidates who had appeared in the viva-voce test. On the basis of that judgment, the present opposite party was called for physical test afresh by letter dated 2.8.2005 fixing 22/23.8.2005 as the date for physical test. 8. Here it may be noticed that the petitioner had not changed the norms according to age and compelled the opposite party to fulfill the norms fixed in the year 1992 for the candidates between the age group of 20-25 years as on 1.1.1993. The opposite party, who was aged about 23 years at that time and had cleared the physical test, became not less than 35 years old at the time when he was again asked to compete the physical test meant for candidates within the age group of 20-25 years. The opposite party, who was aged about 23 years at that time and had cleared the physical test, became not less than 35 years old at the time when he was again asked to compete the physical test meant for candidates within the age group of 20-25 years. The opposite party, however, qualified the physical test in respect of three of the four events meant for the age group of 20-25 years in 1992 but unfortunately he was found short by only two seconds in respect of low hurdles in 2’6" Height 110 mtrs which was required to be cleared in 25 seconds and which he cleared in 27 seconds. The result-sheet annexed by the petitioner with the writ petition is as under : There is some discrepancy between the result sheet (Annex¬ure-1) and the information given to the petitioner under the R.T.I. Act (Annexure-B). Though in the result sheet it is men¬tioned that the lower Hurdles was of the distance of 100 metres in the information given under the R.T.I. Act, it is mentioned that the opposite party cleared the low hurdles of the distance of 110 meres in 27 seconds instead of 25 seconds. 9. It is a matter of consideration as to whether the physical test prescribed for the candidates within the age group of 20-25 years could be made applicable to such candidates at the age of 35 years. It is also liable to be considered as to whether the candidates who had qualified the prescribed physical test within the age group of 20-25 years and were given services in the year 1992-93, could qualify such physical test after 13 years or any other Sub-Inspectors/Inspectors of Police, who entered into the service after qualifying in the physical test, can qualify the physical test at the same standard after a period of 13 years. The Tribunal though directed to take physical test of the persons; it did not mean that they should be subjected to the physical test at the same standards/norms which they cleared at the age of 20-25 years after a lapse of 12-13 years. The Tribunal also took into consideration that according to an advertisement published on 31.7.2002 for recruitment of S.I. of Police, a candidate is required to complete low hurdles in 2’6" height of 100 metres distance in 25 seconds within 10 flights. The Tribunal also took into consideration that according to an advertisement published on 31.7.2002 for recruitment of S.I. of Police, a candidate is required to complete low hurdles in 2’6" height of 100 metres distance in 25 seconds within 10 flights. The Tribunal was of the opinion that due to lapse of time the length of hurdle race was shorten by 10 metres and the opposite party having completed the low hurdle of 110 metre distance at the age of 35 years in 27 second, it can be easily said that two seconds more taken by the opposite party for covering 110 metres can be appropriately considered to be within the qualified time in terms of the present standard. Here it cannot be overlooked that the opposite party in the year 1992 appeared in the physical test and had qualified the same and only thereafter he was called for appearing in the written test. 10. In view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any good grounds to interfere with the impugned order of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the writ peti¬tion is devoid of merit and the same is dismissed. There would be no order as to costs. S.C. PARIJA, J. I agree. Petition dismissed.